- From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 09:02:46 -0700
- To: Jeffrey Winter <JeffreyWinter@crd.com>
- CC: uri@w3.org
IMHO, URI Templates comparison should be case-sensitive and
character-by-character meaning that your two examples are not
equivalent. The URIs resulting from each MAY be equivalent, but that's
a separate question.
- James
Jeffrey Winter wrote:
>
> Nowhere does the spec define what constitutes equivalent
> URI templates. Does
>
> http://example.org/{a} == http://example.org/{b}
>
> for example? Barring any further type annotations
> to {a} and {b}, one would have to assume that is does.
>
> An explicit rule would allow for validation where
> URI templates are used, like WADL. This would
> seem to be a pathological condition:
>
> <application
> xmlns="http://research.sun.com/wadl/2006/07">
> <resources base="http://example.org/">
> <resource path="{a}">
> <method href="#one"/>
> </resource>
> <resource path="{b}">
> <method href="#two"/>
> </resource>
> <resources>
> ...
> </application>
>
> Given the URI templates implied, there's no
> way to determine which method to dispatch to. With
> a defined notion of URI template equivalency, a
> validation rule could be defined for WADL processing.
>
> - Jeff
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 11 October 2006 16:03:07 UTC