On 10 December 2014 at 08:37, Phillips, Addison <addison@lab126.com> wrote:
> Although normalization is often a good idea... normalization might be a
> problem if the local filesystem allows normalized and non-normalized
> representations both to appear. You wouldn't be able to specify a
> non-normalized representation.
>
>
Do you have an example? I'm trying to think it through, but I keep going in
circles. The one I think of is ext[2-4] where the filesystem stores octet
sequences, and shell/applications/etc. use things like the user's locale
environment when representing those octets as text strings. Are you saying
that if we mandate NFC normalisation of URIs, you can't distinguish between
a files whose filename octets are {0xE4} vs {0xC3, 0xA4} (i.e. U+00E4 "รค"
in WIndows-1252 / UTF-8)?
Wouldn't "file://%E4" would cover that?
--
Matthew Kerwin
http://matthew.kerwin.net.au/
Received on Tuesday, 9 December 2014 23:00:05 UTC