W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2010

Issue 263 (text about historical percent-decoding unclear), was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2010 09:23:44 +0100
Message-ID: <4CD26D90.1070107@gmx.de>
To: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
CC: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>, httpbis <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 02.11.2010 10:05, Julian Reschke wrote:
> ...
>> As for the wording of Appendix C.2, even if it stays more or less as it
>> is, it is confusing. It first says that some user agents accept UTF-8,
>> then it says that the first user agent to implement this (i.e. UTF-8)
>> used the local encoding (i.e. NOT UTF-8).
> That's true: this sections needs to be rephrased. To get this right it
> would be valuable to get feedback from Chrome and IE what they actually do.
> ...

I made it say in 

-- snip --
C.2.  Percent Encoding

    Some user agents accept percent encoded ([RFC3986], Section 2.1)
    sequences of characters.  The character encoding being used for
    decoding depends on various factors, including the encoding of the
    referring page, the user agent's locale, it's configuration, and also
    the actual value of the parameter.

    In practice, this is hard to use because those user agents that do
    not support it will display the escaped character sequence to the
    user.  For those user agents that do implement this it is difficult
    to predict what character encoding they actually expect.
-- snip --

That should be more correct, but I welcome corrections from those people 
who may be able to describe more precisely what the two UAs actually do.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 4 November 2010 08:31:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:55 UTC