W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org > January to March 2002

RE: LABEL comparison

From: <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 10:57:14 -0500
Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B103F8AEFA@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
This is one of the reasons that baselines should be used instead of
labels, whenever possible (baselines are identified by URL's, not text
strings, so they have none of these problems).

As I recall, the "octet-by-octet" phrasing was written with the
label header in mind, but I agree that this phrasing doesn't work
so well with XML.  Perhaps some of the folks that care about labels
could comment here?

Cheers,
Geoff

-----Original Message-----
From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 10:00 AM
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Subject: LABEL comparison


Hi,

the spec says in chapter 8 [1]:

"...SHOULD use a case-sensitive octet-by-octet comparison of the two label
names."

I think this must be "character-by-character comparison". The term "octet"
isn't meaningful here because we have XML based marshalling.

Furthermore, I'm not convinced that [2]:

"The value of a label header is the name of a label, encoded using UTF-8.
For example, the label "release-2.0" is identified by the following header:"

is compatible with HTTP and existing servlet engines. Has anybody *tested*
this? Maybe it would be better to specify URL-encoded UTF-8 instead.

Julian



[1]
<http://www.webdav.org/deltav/protocol/draft-ietf-deltav-versioning-20.htm#_
Toc524830601>
[2]
<http://www.webdav.org/deltav/protocol/draft-ietf-deltav-versioning-20.htm#_
Toc524830606>
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2002 10:58:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 13:57:43 GMT