Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote on 2009-07-28:
> I think for our use cases, all we need is for the URI inside the Subject
> elements to match (using 3986 comparison rules). If one side has a set
> attribute, the other side must too.
The same value also, you mean? That's the literal/syntax match I was
referring to, my only question was whether that doesn't rule out the cases
that would be easy and have value, like the one I was using as an example.
But allowing for that ratchets up the spec work.
I agree that syntactic equivalence is simple to specify and immune to
extensions breaking it, yes.
-- Scott
