>Roy T. Fielding wrote: >> I think that, in general, it is far more effective to require that >> a namespace identifier be in a restricted, canonical form, than it >> is to require all parsers to perform URI-equivalence operations >> when comparing two namespaces. Much more efficient as well. > >This makes all sorts of sense to me. We could take the literalist >interpretation of the namespace rec (char-for-char means >bit-for-bit) and then issue an architectural finding that in URIs > >- %-encoding MUST NOT be used unless it's required >- %-encoding MUST use lower-case a-f > >Does this work? -Tim That seems the most sensible solution to me going forward. I think this applies to all current W3C namespace URLs and most others I've seen. -- +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ | Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer | +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ | XML in a Nutshell, 2nd Edition (O'Reilly, 2002) | | http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian2/ | | http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0596002920/cafeaulaitA/ | +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+ | Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ | | Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.cafeconleche.org/ | +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+Received on Tuesday, 9 July 2002 22:25:14 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:55:41 GMT