Re: Change Proposal for ISSUE-170, was: ISSUE-170 rel-uri-valid: Chairs Solicit Proposals

On 02/09/2012 01:52 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> Henri: can you verify that you are OK with Julian's updated proposal?
> If not, can you either suggest changes to that proposal that would make
> it acceptable to you or update your proposal to indicate the rationale
> for the differences?
> If you are OK with Julian's updated proposal, we will issue a call for
> consensus on it. If you update your proposal, I will ask Julian the same
> questions I just asked you.

Henri: my understanding is that you might have been on vacation?  If so, 
can you respond to this request after you dig out from under your likely 
backlog of email?

- Sam Ruby

> On 10/21/2011 09:48 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Julian Reschke<>
>> wrote:
>>> I just recalled why it's ok for RFC 5988 not to say more about
>>> case-sensitivity. In RFC 5988, extension relations are URIs, thus
>>> they are
>>> restricted to US-ASCII anyway. I think we should mirror that, such as by
>>> saying:
>> Even if valid strings have to be constrained to the Basic Latin range,
>> it doesn't follow that case-insensitive comparisons (under general
>> Unicode collation) leads to only Basic Latin strings matching valid
>> strings case-insensitively. So even if only ASCII strings are valid,
>> failing to define ASCII-case-insensitive comparison is sloppy when the
>> values to be compared consist of UTF-16 code units.
>>>> After "Extensions to the predefined set of link types may be
>>>> registered in the Microformats wiki existing-rel-values page. [MFREL]"
>>>> add: "Registered types must. Additionally, absolute URLs that do not
>>>> contain characters U+0041 (LATIN CAPITAL LETTER A) through U+005A
>>>> (LATIN CAPITAL LETTER Z) (inclusive) may be used as link types."
>>> s/Registered types must.// (that wasn't intended, right?)
>> Right.
>>> s/absolute URLs/absolute URLs that only contain US-ASCII characters and/
>> I don't have interest arguing that point either way, so OK.

Received on Tuesday, 21 February 2012 01:35:10 UTC