IPP Model and Semantics, section 4.1.5 'uri' says:
The 'uri' attribute syntax is any valid Uniform Resource Identifier or URI
[RFC2396]. Most often, URIs are simply Uniform Resource Locators or URLs.
The maximum length of URIs used as values of IPP attributes is 1023 octets.
Although most other IPP attribute syntax types allow for only lower-cased
values, this attribute syntax type conforms to the case-sensitive and
case-insensitive rules specified in [RFC2396].
Is that reference sufficient?
The Implementer's Guide doesn't talk about URI comparison. Should it?
Would it need to reference the HTTP specification as you did?
>From: kugler at us.ibm.com [mailto:kugler at us.ibm.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 1999 08:11
>To: ipp at pwg.org>Subject: Re: IPP> About uri
>>>>>Yan Gao wrote:
>Original Article: http://www.egroups.com/list/ipp/?start=5223>> Dear Sir,
>>>> I did not found out in the IPP1.0 protocal whether uri should be
>> case-sensitive or case-insensicive.
>> Could anybody tell me please?
>>>> Yan Gao
>>gaoyan at excite.co.jp>>>>Part of it is case sensitive and part is case insensitive. From
>>3.2.3 URI Comparison
>When comparing two URIs to decide if they match or not, a
>client SHOULD use
>a case-sensitive octet-by-octet comparison of the entire URIs,
>> · A port that is empty or not given is equivalent to the
> for that URI-reference;
> · Comparisons of host names MUST be case-insensitive;
> · Comparisons of scheme names MUST be case-insensitive;
> · An empty abs_path is equivalent to an abs_path of “/”.
>Characters other than those in the “reserved” and “unsafe” sets (see
>section 3.2) are equivalent to their “"%" HEX HEX” encoding.
>>For example, the following three URIs are equivalent: