* James Holderness <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-05-31 02:40]: > I agree completely, but as a content consumer I still need to > know whether to use IRI::Compare or String::Compare when I do > encounter some ridiculous feed that uses example (a). I'm > hoping for a simple answer along the lines of "Use > IRI:Compare", "Use String::Compare", or "The spec doesn't say, > so you may use whatever you prefer".
RFC4287 defines the relation value in terms of IRIs, but does not require that relations be compared as such, and then constrains the set of values to a subset of IRIs. This constrained set is more amenable to simple string comparison. My interpretation of these facts is that string comparison is explicitly expected. Given then that all implementations that I have read the source of do indeed compare relation values as strings, my conclusion is that while you are free to compare them as IRIs, doing so is unwise; likewise, while you are free to specify registered relation values in your published feeds as absolute IRIs including the http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/ base, doing so is unwise. The spec indeed doesn’t say, so you may indeed use whatever you prefer. That does not mean all preferences are equally wise. Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>
