On Mon, 21 Sep 1998, Larry Masinter wrote: > The problem is that UTF-8 doesn't quite have a well-defined > 'canonical' form yet, either, although one is being developed, the > canonicalization algorithm won't be at "draft standard". So you might > have two browsers that would enter the same user name with different > UTF-8 encodings, too. Good point. In fact, the UTF-8 spec itself is still proposed, so the HTTP spec can't reference it normatively. > And we're not normally requiring clients to implement UTF-8 > transformations of user type-in at all so this will be a big problem. Fair enough. > On the other hand, it seems inappropriate to restrict user *names* to > US-ASCII. I wonder if we could change the BNF and description text > from "user name" and "username" to "user id", even if we leave > > username = "username" "=" user-id How about we restrict user-ids and typed-in passwords to US-ASCII for now, declare encoding of non-ASCII characters in those fields undefined but explicitly forbid use of localized charsets (e.g., ISO-8859-1)? Then we can amend it to use UTF-8 later with a spec that progresses separately on the standards track. - ChrisReceived on Monday, 21 September 1998 08:13:22 EDT
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 06:33:24 EDT