- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 29 Apr 2003 21:57:57 -0500
- To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@apache.org>
- Cc: www-archive@w3.org
On Tue, 2003-04-29 at 18:27, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > > sigh... trudge thru archives... you clearly know what text > > you're talking about; is it so much trouble to give me a > > pointer? or at least a date from a mail message? > > > > I don't see it in mail from you to www-tag this month. > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Apr/author.html > > More clues? > > Right in that message: In what message? Oh well, no need for a pointer since you gave me a copy. > Therefore, Namespaces shouldn't say that the namespaces (identified) > are different, even for a limited purpose. What it should say is that > the identifier is assumed to be in normal form (because consistency > has > its own rewards) and that no additional normalization is required > prior to comparison (for efficiency reasons), noting that *because* of > this decision, inconsistent use of equivalent URIs in the namespace > attributes will result in a regrettable, but not fatal, false negative > match when they are mixed within the same process. Authors are > therefore encouraged to be consistent for the sake of efficiency. > > That is all that needs to be said. It does not need to say that the > identifiers are *different*. Hmm... OK, that's a coherent position. It seems pretty subtle, but it meets all my requirements, I guess. > > And this is the second time you've replied to my requests > > for an example without providing one. > > I provided an example. Perhaps I wasn't clear: I mean an example of two URIs. The actual strings. Not an example scenario. > You just didn't accept it. That's your problem. Let's not go there, OK? > TimBL provided the other example, which is that URI processors tend > to be reused and therefore claiming this thing is a URI but does not > adhere to the principles of URIs is the same as declaring a subset > of the URI specification. > > ....Roy -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Tuesday, 29 April 2003 22:57:34 UTC