Subject: RE: [[email-masked]: Comments on NFSv4 rfc3010bis- 05 draft]

From: "Noveck, Dave" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 09:07:28 -0800

OK, I see.

Form KC consists of a compatibility decomposition followed
by a *canonical* composition.  Never mind.

-----Original Message-----
From: Nicolas Williams [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 11:59 AM
To: Noveck, Dave
Cc: [email-masked]'; Spencer Shepler; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [[email-masked]: Comments on NFSv4
rfc3010bis- 05 draft]

Form K would replace the ligature with "f" and "i" - not the other way
around.

Nico

On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 12:46:06PM -0800, Noveck, Dave wrote:
> OK, so where did I go wrong?
> 
>      a) ligature fi followed by "le" and the string "file" are 
>         compatibility equivalent.
> 
>      b) If two strings are compatibility equivalent, then
>         under a K-style normalization form, only one of them
>         can be valid.
>  
>      c) The compatibility composition of "file" is the ligature
>         fi followed by "le".
> 
>      d) Thus ligature fi followed by the string "le" is valid 
>         under normalization form KC.
> 
>      e) The string "file" is invalid under normalization form KC.
> 
> QED.
> 
> So if the result e) is false, which of a), b), c), d) are false?