Title: Message
Other
alternative names might include:
Resolution Master
Resolution Chancellor
Chief
Governor
Dictator
Secretary
Lord
Suzerain
Arch Duke
Oligarch
or of
course
Complete Tyrant
just a
thought...
smiles, Bill
-----Original Message-----
From: Loren West
[mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003
3:15 PM
To:
Subject: RE: [xri]
The case for being insensitive
Thank you for the editorial pass. Do we
have a name for the "manager of a namespace" (the entity responsible for
running a namespace resolver)? If not, how does "Resolution
Authority" sound?
=Loren
-----Original Message-----
From: Wachob, Gabe
[mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003
3:03 PM
To: 'Loren West'; Lindelsee, Mike;
Subject: RE: [xri] The case for being
insensitive
+1
I
think Loren's understanding is reasonable and should be the approach of the
TC.
Comments are removed for the purposes of equivalence &
normalization (this is my understanding - which I do not know we have
discussed) so the case sensitivity issue is not impacted here because case
sensitivity is a normalization/equivalence rule. The wording needs to be
explicit. This assumes we agree on the "comment" mechanism, which we have
not yet agreed to.
Little Quibbles:
We
have to be careful with the wording "manager of each namespace" - a concept
I'm not sure we've discussed before. This is a quibble - we can reword this
in the terminology and conceptual framework of the current spec. Also
the "byte for byte" equivalence statement should probably be "character
for character after NFC normalization" (which I believe it is now).
-Gabe
-----Original Message-----
From: Loren West
[mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17,
2003 1:46 PM
To: 'Lindelsee, Mike';
Subject: [xri] The case for being
insensitive
Hi TC'ers,
I agree with Mike except for the comment portion of the XRI.
Maybe the spec. should read:
Two XRIs are equivalent if the NON-COMMENT portions of the XRIs are
byte-for-byte equivalent.
That being the normative part of the spec. At this point,
some people may mis-interpret the intent (as I did), so maybe a discussion
of case sensitivity in regards to resolution should follow
(non-normative):
During resolution, the manager of each namespace may have their own
rules for case sensitivity and equivalence in general.
One namespace owner might consider "Invoice" and "invoice" to be the
same for the purposes of resolution. Another may consider "grey" and
"gray" to be the same. Since you can't know that without invoking
the resolution process, they should be considered different XRIs
that happen to point to the same resource.
Obviously, this is a sensitive issue :-)
=Loren
-----Original Message-----
From: Lindelsee,
Mike [mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, September
17, 2003 11:57 AM
To:
Subject: RE: [xri] Draft -07 feedback
from another Visa person (responses cont'd)
Hi All,
I'd like to follow up on the case-insensitivity
issue and mention what I see as a reasonable example that would argue
against case-insensitivity. In my experience, the vast majority of
my accounts/login IDs on various systems are case sensitive. Also,
in unix-based systems (and many others), most identifiers (anything
in the file system for sure) are case sensitive. If any of
these identifiers are to be used in XRIs, the case-sensitivity
would need to be maintained, or ambiguity would be
introduced.
Between this issue and the Unicode issue, it
seems to me that it would be a bad idea to try to make any part of an
XRI case insensitive.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Loren West
[mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, September
04, 2003 11:36 AM
To: 'Dave McAlpin'; 'Sakimura, Nat';
'Wachob, Gabe';
Subject: RE: [xri]
Draft -07 feedback from another Visa person (responses
cont'd)
Case insensitivity is a form of normalization that a large
population of people receive benefit from. If there's a way
to provide that benefit to those people without degrading
functionality where it doesn't make sense, then I think we should do
it.
I'd hate to see case insensitivity for ALPHA characters go
away.
=LOREN
-----Original
Message-----
From: Dave McAlpin
[mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, September
04, 2003 11:06 AM
To: 'Sakimura, Nat'; 'Wachob, Gabe';
Subject: RE: [xri] Draft -07
feedback from another Visa person (responses
cont'd)
So are we
OK with case-insensitive comparison for ALPHA characters in the
authority component, or should we drop this
altogether?
-----Original
Message-----
From:
Sakimura, Nat [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, September 04,
2003 10:57 AM
To:
Dave McAlpin; Wachob, Gabe;
Subject: RE: [xri] Draft -07
feedback from another Visa person (responses
cont'd)
I do not
think that there is a good way of introducing “case insensitivity”
to Unicode in general.
Case
insensitivity is a form of normalization, which is very problematic
for the international character set. IMHO, only meaningful form of
general equivalence is the bit to bit comparison or the comparison
of the resolved result from the same authority.
Nat
-----Original
Message-----
From:
Dave McAlpin [mailto:]
Sent: Friday, September 05,
2003 2:43 AM
To:
'Wachob, Gabe';
Subject: RE: [xri] Draft -07
feedback from another Visa person (responses
cont'd)
