- From: barili systems limited <dwmorris@netcom.com>
- Date: Fri, 31 May 1996 21:39:10 -0700 (PDT)
- To: Dave Kristol <dmk@allegra.att.com>
- Cc: dwm@shell.portal.com, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
On Fri, 31 May 1996, Dave Kristol wrote: > David Morris, dwmorris@netcom.com, asked Jim Gettys: > > The question for the experts is: Is there some > > protocol reason that userid shouldn't be redefined as > > *(TEXTnotCOLON)? > > > > If need be, I or my crew could survey a few more browsers to build the > > case for current practice. I'll be happy to post a proposed edit to the > > list if there isn't an obvious reason to not make the change. > > I can't think of a *protocol* reason. Furthermore, I suspect any > robust server is indifferent to what characters precede ':' (including > CTLs!). That's certainly true of my server and, I think, NCSA and > Apache. > > So the question is, what do clients do? I would welcome David's survey > of current practice before endorsing the change, but I think it's a > reasonable one. OK, I have now also tried UNIX/Mosaic 2.74b and MS InternetExp 2.0 and both also accept blanks, etc. I didn't check these, but I discovered Netscape 2.xx even allows a ":" in the name field. Perhaps not really a problem since the server is either going to accept the uid/pw or reject it. Dave Morris
Received on Friday, 31 May 1996 21:43:59 UTC