- From: <keshlam@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 11:28:58 -0400
- To: John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
- cc: Josef Dietl <josef@mozquito.com>, "xml-uri@w3.org" <xml-uri@w3.org>
>Char-by-char equivalence is too weak for URIs. > RFC 2396 resolution tells us how to convert relative URIs to absolute, > which can then be compared char-by-char. You're confusing URIs and URI References. Absolutizing deals with converting a URI Reference into a URI. Char-by-char is fine for URIs, _if_ you ignore embedded-relative and character-escaping issues. If you want to deal with those additional points, you need to Canonicalize the URI. This is starting to get beyond the definition of URIs; the URI spec mentions canonicalization but says that this process is unique to each URI Scheme... and there's no bound on how many schemes can be invented, so this is generally handled on the server side of things. As far as I know there's no way to ask a server how it would canonicalize a URI even if you are willing to do a network transaction. The question of how the server maps Canonicalized URIs into responses is yet another layer of interpretation, of course. But that really is beyond the scope of the URI spec. ______________________________________ Joe Kesselman / IBM Research
Received on Tuesday, 23 May 2000 11:29:34 UTC