- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 00:42:43 -0800
- To: Mike Brown <mike@skew.org>
- Cc: uri@w3.org
On Tuesday, February 10, 2004, at 09:20 PM, Mike Brown wrote: > Section 4.4 says that same-document references are determined only by > URI > identity (not equivalence). > > Therefore, I would assume that none of these examples are same-document > references, even though I, personally, think that retrieval of a new > representation in order to satisfy the reference would be undesirable > in every > case: > > Base URI URI reference > =========================== ======================== > file:///x file://localhost/x#y > http:///x http://localhost/x#y > http://www.example.com:80/x http://www.example.com/x#y > http://www.example.com/x http://www.EXAMPLE.com/x#y It will depend on the implementation. I have clarified that. > I would like to see defaults, whether they be defined by schemes (e.g. > http's > "80" for port and file's "localhost" for host) or by the URI spec > (e.g. the > recent addition of "localhost" for host for all hierarchical-path > schemes), be > mentioned in section 6, because they're almost certainly going to > affect > comparisons for equivalence. Done. > I would also like confirmation as to whether the intent of section 4.4 > is to > define identical string comparison as the only way to determine > whether a > reference is same-document, ruling out the possibility of equivalence > being a > factor. The intent is to match what applications do in practice. I have made it clear that normalization is an optional step that can't be assumed. ....Roy
Received on Friday, 13 February 2004 03:43:06 UTC