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

From: "Noveck, Dave" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 12:46:06 -0800

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?

-----Original Message-----
From: Nicolas Williams [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2003 3:12 PM
To: Noveck, Dave
Cc: [email-masked]'; Spencer Shepler; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [[email-masked]: Comments on NFSv4
rfc3010bis- 05 draft]

No, ASCII text is a legal sub-set of UTF-8.

8859-1/2, non-ASCII text, is NOT legal UTF-8.

Cheers,

Nico

On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 06:38:10PM -0800, Noveck, Dave wrote:
> I'm not an expert but my understanding of normalization form KC
> is that under it "file" (that is, ascii f, ascii i, ascii l, ascii e)
> would be an invalid file name.  Can anyone who is familiar with this
> stuff confirm or deny?

---

From: Nicolas Williams <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 10:58:37 -0600

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

Nico