My reading is that HTTP is limited to iso-8859-1 *on the wire*, and requires RFC2047 encoding for characters outside of that range. Do you disagree with that? My intent was not to disallow RFC2047, but rather to allow other encodings into iso-8859-1 where appropriate. Disallowing RFC2047 would be foolish and counter-productive; however, no one has said why constraining future headers from using other encodings than RFC2047 is a desirable -- or even realistic -- thing to do. I'll follow up in more detail soon... On 27/03/2008, at 4:33 PM, Martin Duerst wrote: > At 03:21 08/03/26, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > >> I see no reason to change the existing encoding requirement unless >> we are to allow raw UTF-8 in headers. Anything else would just make >> the implementations worse. BCP137 is not mature enough to use in >> HTTP. > > I definitely agree with Roy here. > > HTTP is not a context limited to 7bit bytes, > so there is no need for anything from BCP137. > > Regards, Martin. > > > #-#-# Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University > #-#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/Received on Thursday, 27 March 2008 05:42:28 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 6 June 2008 08:04:35 GMT