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 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 23 October 2007 06:11:49 GMT