28 Jan 05:50
RE: Extension Relation Type Comparison - LC Comment on draft-nottingham-http-plink-header-07
Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran <at> hueniverse.com>
2010-01-28 04:50:03 GMT
2010-01-28 04:50:03 GMT
> -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Nottingham [mailto:mnot <at> mnot.net] > Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 8:28 PM > To: Eran Hammer-Lahav > Cc: apps-discuss <at> ietf.org > Subject: Re: Extension Relation Type Comparison - LC Comment on draft- > nottingham-http-plink-header-07 > > > On 26/01/2010, at 4:03 AM, Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote: > > > The current text about comparing extension relation types is unclear: > > > > When extension relation types are compared, they MUST be compared as > > URIs in a case-insensitive fashion, character-by-character. Because > > of this, all-lowercase URIs SHOULD be used for extension relations. > > > > What does it mean "compared as URIs"? > > > > It is clear that these two URIs would be deemed equivalent: > > > > http://example.com/rel/type > > HTTP://example.COM/rel/TYPE > > > > But are they also equivalent to: > > > > http://example.com:80/rel/type > > None of those are equivalent; it specifies case-insensitive, character-by- > character. "As URIs" alludes to the fact that an extension type might be > serialised in a non-URI form; e.g., as a CURIE, if that's your cup of tea. I have talked to a few folks about this and they all assumed 'as URI' means that outside the lower-case exception, normal URI comparison rules apply. I agree with your intention though that these should be compared as case-insensitive strings. EHL
RSS Feed