W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > January to March 2000

Re: Case sensitive names and authoring

From: Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org>
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 20:56:11 -0800 (PST)
To: jamsden@us.ibm.com
cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10003022049070.14301-100000@nebula.lyra.org>
On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 jamsden@us.ibm.com wrote:
> HTTP URLs aren't case sensitive,

RFC 2616, S3.2.3 states "When comparing two URIs to decide if they match
or not, a client SHOULD use a case-sensitive octet-by-octet comparison of
the entire URIs, with these exceptions: ..."

In other words: they *are* case-sensitive.

Apache certainly treats them that way. Try these two URLs:


You'll find the latter fails.

Note that HTTP servers running on an MSFT platform typically treat URLs in
a case-insensitive fashion (due to the filesystem being insensitive).

> but some resources are. For example, Java
> source managed by a WebDAV server must retain the case in the package and
> class names or the code won't compile. mod_dav foldes all resource names to
> lower case, so .java files on the server won't compile.

WHAT?!!  mod_dav does NOT do any case-folding. Euh... what made you think
it does?

> It seems that WebDAV could, like HTTP, be case insensitive while at the
> same time require that the server retain the case of resource URLs. That
> is, the URL segments in the bindings would retain the case in the target
> when it was entered, but access to those resources would be case
> insensitive. If this is not the case, WebDAV can't be used to store Java.
> That would be a real bummer!
> Would the proposal above be acceptable, and in the spirit of HTTP?

No and no.  (IMO)

I certainly do not want to take the performance hit to start doing
case-insensitive work in mod_dav and Apache. I am in great favor of
continuing to operate in a case-sensitive fashion, and I believe the
relevant RFCs encourage that, too.


Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Received on Thursday, 2 March 2000 23:53:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:01:21 UTC