Re: [Json] String comparisons -- LAST CHANCE ON PROPOSALS

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Tue, 11 June 2013 22:40 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B4AD21F9A6F for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Jun 2013 15:40:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.459
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.459 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.140, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T18wwVo1ukBo for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Jun 2013 15:40:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C480B21F9A61 for <json@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Jun 2013 15:40:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-0-66-165.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [50.0.66.165]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r5BMeaxN002725 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 11 Jun 2013 15:40:37 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\))
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <A723FC6ECC552A4D8C8249D9E07425A70FC40C50@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 15:40:36 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <9E33C220-8475-405C-94FC-E060CA7AE29F@vpnc.org>
References: <A723FC6ECC552A4D8C8249D9E07425A70FC40C50@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
To: "Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" <jhildebr@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508)
Cc: "json@ietf.org" <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] String comparisons -- LAST CHANCE ON PROPOSALS
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" <json.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/json>
List-Post: <mailto:json@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 22:40:44 -0000

<no hat>
On Jun 11, 2013, at 3:37 PM, "Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" <jhildebr@cisco.com> wrote:

> On 6/11/13 11:44 AM, "Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:
> 
>> For example, the following four keys MUST be considered equivalent:
>> 
>> * "\u002F"
>> * "\u002f"
>> * "\/"
>> * "/"
> 
> I'd like to suggest adding some names that are not equivalent as well,
> like:
> 
> "\u212B" (ANGSTROM SIGN: Å)
> "\u00C5" (LATIN CAPITAL LETTER A WITH RING ABOVE: Å)
> "A\u030A" (LATIN CAPITAL LETTER A, COMBINING RING ABOVE: Å)
> "\u00E5" (LATIN SMALL LETTER A WITH RING ABOVE, å)

-1. Both of the proposed texts are clear on not case and normalization, aren't they?

> and if we could put *&!@# non-ASCII7 characters in an RFC, that would
> actually make sense to the reader.

OK, so -2 now. :-)

--Paul Hoffman