OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

xri message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [xri] Comparison Rules


any thoughts on this last issues regarding media type (item 'c' in Drummond's list)?  This is the only outstanding issue I have for this set of changes.

On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 4:45 PM, Will Norris <willnorris@google.com> wrote:
Ah, one more I overlooked...

On Jan 28, 2010, at 6:26 PM, Drummond Reed wrote:

a) Comparison of Subject and Alias values MUST based on the comparison rules
defined in RFC 3986, specifically section 6.2.3, Scheme-Based Normalization.

b) Comparison of Link/rel values MUST be as defined in Web Linking.

c) Comparison of Link/type values MUST be after normalization according to
the rules for media types in section 3.7 of RFC2616.

d) Comparison of Property and Link/Property values MUST follow the same
rules as for Link/rel values (above).

RFC 2616 doesn't define normalization rules for media type values.  It does specify a few comparison rules, namely that type, subtype, and parameter names are case-insensitive, and that the case sensitivity of parameter values is dependent on the parameter name.  It also talks about where whitespace is allowed in the value, but this is formatting restriction, not comparison.  Should we be referencing 2616 instead of 2046, for the initial definition of 'type' in XRD?  That might actually make a lot of sense, since 2046 doesn't actually define the syntax of a media type... that's in 2045 (as well as 2616, of course).

RFC 2616 does also talk about canonical form of messages of certain media types, but I'm sure that's not what this was referring to.

-will



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]