RE: SEARCH by last path segment, Was: SEARCH for displayname

> - are people aware that path segments will always be URL-encoded, so 
> that in order to match an "A umlaut", you'll have to insert a 
> sequence 
> of percent-escaped bytes? (and that in this case, caseless 
> matching will 
> probably not work as expected)?
> 

If we make pathsegments be unencoded, then we have another advantage
to using that special syntax: it *can* do caseless matching. We 
could name it "decoded-path-segment" if that would make it less
confusing to have different encoding requirements than the URL.
Cool!

lisa