Re: [jdev] Case sensitivity in JIDs

2008-12-13 Thread Jonathan Schleifer
Am 12.12.2008 um 23:00 schrieb Alexander Gnauck: gives you this output: te...@server.com/Resource te...@server.com/Resource Why is ß replaced with ss? AFAIK, ß is allowed in the username part of the JID and with the new IDN standard which is currently in discussion, it would be even

Re: [jdev] Case sensitivity in JIDs

2008-12-13 Thread Alexander Gnauck
Jonathan Schleifer schrieb: Why is ß replaced with ss? AFAIK, ß is allowed in the username part of the JID and with the new IDN standard which is currently in discussion, it would be even allowed in the domain. I have not updated my stringprep implementation for a while. Maybe I should get

Re: [jdev] Case sensitivity in JIDs

2008-12-12 Thread Alexander Gnauck
Arne Claassen schrieb: Hmmm... then stringprep in agsXMPP might be borked, since in it user names stay in the case they were sent, which is where my troubles started. I don't use stringprep in all constructors in the jid class of agsXMPP because stringprep is a heavy process and needs

[jdev] Case sensitivity in JIDs

2008-12-10 Thread Arne Claassen
I'm running into a problem with sending messages directly to resources which I think is related to case sensitivity, so I wanted to make sure I am understanding the spec right. Should [EMAIL PROTECTED]/Resource be the same as [EMAIL PROTECTED]/resource? (This is using ejabberd) I switched

Re: [jdev] Case sensitivity in JIDs

2008-12-10 Thread Arne Claassen
Thanks for the info. Will adjust my logic accordingly. arne On Dec 10, 2008, at 11:40 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: Peter Saint-Andre wrote: Arne Claassen wrote: I'm running into a problem with sending messages directly to resources which I think is related to case sensitivity, so I

Re: [jdev] Case sensitivity in JIDs

2008-12-10 Thread Remko Tronçon
Thanks for the info. Will adjust my logic accordingly. Actually, if you just stringprep every Jid (which you should do to be correct anyway), then comparing Jids will be done correctly automatically for you; no need for logic. cheers, Remko ___ JDev