Re: [apps-discuss] Review of draft-ietf-appsawg-file-scheme

[Graham Klyne <[e-mail]>]

On 13/04/2016 09:28, Matthew Kerwin wrote:
>>>     Systems exhibit different levels of case-sensitivity.  Unless the
>>> >>    file system is known to be case-insensitive, implementations MUST
>>> >>    maintain the case of file and directory names when translating file
>>> >>    URIs to and from the local system's representation of file paths, and
>>> >>    any systems or devices that transport file URIs MUST NOT alter the
>>> >>    case of file URIs they transport.
>>> >>
>> >
>> >This is protocol language, not URI format/semantics language.
>> >
>> >I believe that the needs of this spec are served by something along the
>> >lines of:
>> >
>> >​​
>> >     Some systems have case-sensitive file naming and some do not.  Hence
>> >the  file scheme supports case sensitivity, in order to retain the case
>> >as given. Any transport-related handling of the file URI scheme MUST
>> >retain the case as given. Any mapping to or from a case-insensitive form
>> >is soley the responsibility of the implementation processing the file
>> >URI on behalf of the referenced file system.
>> >
>> >
> Sure thing, I'll work with that suggestion.

I think this is pretty much redundant.  URIs are case sensitive per RFC3986.

(Local interpretation may not be, but I'd suggest that's a local implementation 
issue.  At most, make a note as a local handling issue in the appendices? 
Hmmm... are there any security considerations here that should be flagged - 
relating to possible unexpected aliasing from case-only differences between files.)

#g