Re: [apps-discuss] Feedback on draft-ietf-appsawg-json-pointer-00

["Martin J. Dürst" <[e-mail]>]

On 2012/03/02 6:45, Paul C. Bryan wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 12:14 -0800, Mike Acar wrote:

>> That is, if the reference token equals the name of some value within the
>> object, move to that value. However, the tokens and values are Unicode
>> strings; I'm not an expert in Unicode, but my impression is that testing
>> Unicode strings for equality is not as simple as comparing sequences of
>> bytes. For example, there are linguistic considerations: I believe
>> German ö and oe are considered identical.
>
>
> While we may consider ö and oe to be linguistically equivalent, I do no
> believe they are considered lexicographically equivalent in a Unicode
> string comparison. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong. Would it help
> to define the comparison as being lexicographical?

No. Lexicographical is usually used with respect to order, not 
equivalence (see e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexicographical_order)

>> There's also the question of JSON documents with different encodings;
>> UTF8 is the default, but UTF-16 and -32 with both endiannesses are also
>> supported. Presumably this question will disappear in practice, since
>> implementations will operate on deserialized data structures, not on
>> JSON texts.
>
> Since they're logically the same underlying Unicode representations, I'm
> not sure there's any issue to consider here.

The best way to spec this is to say that equivalence is checked 
codepoint-by-codepoint. That solves both issues, because codepoints are 
independent of UTF-8/UTF-16/UTF-32, simply the Unicode character numbers.

Regards,    Martin.