W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2008

Re: PROPOSAL: i74: Encoding for non-ASCII headers

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2008 08:00:42 +1100
Cc: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <A3C6E503-A406-44EE-892E-D9A714FC44C6@mnot.net>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>

Julian -- sorry, I mean to say that we need to consider excluding C1.

Jamie -- if we later decided to allow UTF-8, we'd of course have to  
figure out how it fit into the overall picture. This sub-issue is just  
about whether we should allow C1 in iso-8859-1, as the spec is  
currently written.

Cheers,


On 04/04/2008, at 7:26 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> Jamie Lokier wrote:
>> I agree with everything Julian said, except:
>> Julian Reschke wrote:
>>> TEXT already allows C1 controls (and always did) (<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-latest.html#rule.TEXT 
>>> >):
>>>
>>>  TEXT           = %x20-7E | %x80-FF | LWS
>>>                 ; any OCTET except CTLs, but including LWS
>>>
>>> That being said, I'd like it to exclude C1 controls.
>> If C1 controls _in the form of octets %x80-9F_ are excluded, and HTTP
>> agents begin to reject TEXT containing those octets, it will be  
>> harder
>> to transition to UTF-8 later.  (In case you'd forgotton, UTF-8 uses
>> those octet values for normal characters).
>
> No I didn't. Good point.
>
>> ...
>
> BR, Julian


--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Thursday, 3 April 2008 21:01:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:46 GMT