- From: Steve Haflich <smh@franz.com>
- Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 19:11:42 -0700
- To: "Babich, Alan" <ABabich@filenet.com>
- Cc: "'Kevin Wiggen'" <wiggs@xythos.com>, www-webdav-dasl@w3.org
From: "Babich, Alan" <ABabich@filenet.com> A null string is similar to a zero length string since neither contains any characters, so it seems odd to me to put null strings and zero length strings at opposite ends of the sort. I would think doing that could confuse some end users who are not sophisticated in the subtleties of zero length Strings Versus Null Strings. It also forces the implementation to split the semantic hair of whether zero length strings are null or not. ... You still need to split that hair, methinks. _If_ it is indeed possible for an implementation to return both zero length and null strings (is it possible???) then the sort order must specify which sorts first.
Received on Thursday, 8 June 2000 22:12:50 UTC