- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 20 Feb 2002 00:31:55 -0600
- To: hardie@oakthorn.com
- Cc: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com>, uri@w3.org, elharo@metalab.unc.edu, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
On Tue, 2002-02-19 at 18:05, Ted Hardie wrote: > Dan writes> > > URIs are character sequences; they're equal when they > > have the same characters an unequal when they don't. > > i.e. strcmp() is necessary and sufficient for comparing URIs. > > > > There are cases when the URI spec guarantees that two URIs > > point to the same thing; e.g. > > http://www.w3.org/ > > and > > http://WWW.W3.ORG/ > > > > but that doesn't make the two URIs equal. If you want > > to be sure that consumers realize you mean the same thing, > > I recommend writing it the same way, rather than relying > > on consumers to do scheme-specific equivalence processing. > > This seems to contradict to RFC 2396, sections 2.1 and 3. > 3, in particular, says: > > The URI syntax does not require that the scheme-specific-part have > any general structure or set of semantics which is common among all > URI. > > I read that to mean that http://www.bar.org/ and http://www.BAR.org/ > may be equivalent where file://123abcdef and file://123ABCDEF might > not be, and that a reference to the definition of the http and file > URI schemes would be required to determine which semantics need be > applied. But that doesn't mean that http://www.bar.org/ and http://www.BAR.org/ are the same URI. > In other words, the URI spec seems to say that semantic equivalence is > scheme specific and string comparison alone is not enough. string comparison is enough to tell if two URIs are the same URI. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 20 February 2002 01:31:25 UTC