Discovery 2.1 - Identifier normalization rules are not extensible

[Michael Jones]

In reaction to this statement "The Identifier normalization rules are not extensible", Yaron Goland wrote:

This seems backwards to me. As I argue below shouldn’t we say “we define the behavior for email and HTTPS, everything else is currently UNDEFINED.”?

What is the reason we chose to say that the rules are not extensible?

[Nat Sakimura]

Check with Tony.

[Nat Sakimura]

Fix #354 - Add PPID def.

→ 672e4d0c2830

[Michael Jones]

Fix #354: Discovery 2.1 - Identifier normalization rules are not extensible Fix #355: Standard 2.1.1 - Possibly overly broad treatment of @ character Fix #356: Discovery 2.1.3 - Extracting hosts from URIs

→ 2981ff120fd7