| ">" | "[" | "]" | "^" | "`" | "{" | "|" | "}" | "~"
                  | octets 127-255 (7F-FF hex)

   In addition, octet 0 (0 hex) should NEVER be used, in either
   unencoded or %-encoded form.

   An URN ends when an octet/character from the excluded character set
   () is encountered.  The character from the excluded
   character set is NOT part of the URN.

3. Support of existing legacy naming systems and new naming systems

   Any namespace (existing or newly-devised) that is proposed as an
   URN-namespace and fulfills the criteria of URN-namespaces MUST be
   expressed in this syntax.  If names in these namespaces contain
   characters other than those defined for the URN character set, they
   MUST be translated into canonical form as discussed in section 2.2.









 
RFC 2141                       URN Syntax                      May 1997


4. URN presentation and transport

   The URN syntax defines the canonical format for URNs and all URN
   transport and interchanges MUST take place in this format. Further,
   all URN-aware applications MUST offer the option of displaying URNs
   in this canonical form to allow for direct transcription (for example
   by cut and paste techniques).  Such applications MAY support display
   of URNs in a more human-friendly form and may use a character set
   that includes characters that aren't permitted in URN syntax as
   defined in this RFC (that is, they may replace %-notation by
   characters in some extended character set in display to humans).

5. Lexical Equivalence in URNs

   For various purposes such as caching, it's often desirable to
   determine if two URNs are the same without resolving them. The
   general purpose means of doing so is by testing for "lexical
   equivalence" as defined below.

   Two URNs are lexically equivalent if they are octet-by-octet equal
   after the following preprocessing:

           1. normalize the case of the leading "urn:" token
           2. normalize the case of the NID
           3. normalizing the case of any %-escaping

   Note that %-escaping MUST NOT be removed.

   Some namespaces may define additional lexical equivalences, such as
   case-insensitivity of the NSS (or parts thereof).  Additional lexical
   equivalences MUST be documented as part of namespace registration,
   MUST always have the effect of eliminating some of the false
   negatives obtained by the procedure above, and MUST NEVER say that
   two URNs are not equivalent if the procedure above says they are
   equivalent.

6. Examples of lexical equivalence

   The following URN comparisons highlight the lexical equivalence
   definitions:

           1- URN:foo:a123,456
           2- urn:foo:a123,456
           3- urn:FOO:a123,456
           4- urn:foo:A123,456
           5- urn:foo:a123%2C456
           6- URN:FOO:a123%2c456





 
RFC 2141                       URN Syntax                      May 1997


   URNs 1, 2, and 3 are all lexically equivalent.  URN 4 is not
   lexically equivalent any of the other URNs of the above set.  URNs 5
   and 6 are only lexically equivalent to each other.

7. Functional Equivalence in URNs

   Functional equivalence is determined by practice within a given
   namespace and managed by resolvers for that namespeace. Thus, it is
   beyond the scope of this document.  Namespace registration must
   include guidance on how to determine functional equivalence for that
   namespace, i.e. when two URNs are the identical within a namespace.

8. Security considerations