At 04:37 06/05/27, Robert Sayre wrote: >Huh, I personally feel that the comparison ladder is better. Sort of >like, "if it comes down to that, we can't help you", even for atom:id. >The WG definitely felt simple string comparison was needed for >atom:id, so we spent *a lot* of time on that text.
I think for simple IDs, where there is no expectation of resolution, character-by-character comparison is better. But either way, the spec is the way it is now. >I don't feel that effort would pay off here, at all. Especially since >a consumer that matched >"HTTP://www.IANA.org:80/assignments/relation/alternate" would be in >error. That's ridiculous standards weenie stuff, don't you think? Yes, a content producer that expected a) HTTP://www.IANA.org:80/assignments/relation/alternate to always be different from b) http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/alternate would be stupid. But on the other hand, a content producer that expected a) and b) to always be treated the same would be ridiculous, too. The conclusion is that a content producer that uses HTTP://www.IANA.org:80/assignments/relation/alternate at all does something wrong. Regards, Martin. #-#-# Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University #-#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
