Re: Raising a few issues in fielding-uri-rfc2396-0x

Williams, Stuart wrote:

>>As to "." and "..", I agree with TimBL that it is violently inconsistent 
>>to restrict the special meaning of these syntaxes to the relative form 
>>of URIs.  If I am given the URI http://example.com/a/./b/../c I will 
>>always, 100% of the time, regard that as http://example.com/a/c. 
> 
> Does 100% of the time include the (perhaps ill-advised) use of the first of
> these URIs to name an XML namespace?

Namespace-processing code pretty well uniformly uses strcmp() or 
equivalent, so indeed, used as namespaces, these would probably be 
regarded as different.  Blecch.  Indeed, this would be ill-advised.  -Tim