W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > October 2011

Re: Change Proposal for ISSUE-170, was: ISSUE-170 rel-uri-valid: Chairs Solicit Proposals

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 16:48:17 +0300
Message-ID: <CAJQvAudhbS0jtQOeE4Zy0PQsZLGWmLQ651VbnDBNgwKg0XgDfg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> I just recalled why it's ok for RFC 5988 not to say more about
> case-sensitivity. In RFC 5988, extension relations are URIs, thus they are
> restricted to US-ASCII anyway. I think we should mirror that, such as by
> saying:

Even if valid strings have to be constrained to the Basic Latin range,
it doesn't follow that case-insensitive comparisons (under general
Unicode collation) leads to only Basic Latin strings matching valid
strings case-insensitively. So even if only ASCII strings are valid,
failing to define ASCII-case-insensitive comparison is sloppy when the
values to be compared consist of UTF-16 code units.

>> After "Extensions to the predefined set of link types may be
>> registered in the Microformats wiki existing-rel-values page. [MFREL]"
>> add: "Registered types must. Additionally, absolute URLs that do not
>> contain characters U+0041 (LATIN CAPITAL LETTER A) through U+005A
>> (LATIN CAPITAL LETTER Z) (inclusive) may be used as link types."
> s/Registered types must.// (that wasn't intended, right?)


> s/absolute URLs/absolute URLs that only contain US-ASCII characters and/

I don't have interest arguing that point either way, so OK.

Henri Sivonen
Received on Friday, 21 October 2011 13:48:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:17 UTC