- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2010 00:19:34 +0100
- To: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>
- CC: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 01.12.2010 23:53, Adam Barth wrote: > ... >> Not to mention that it's silly to treat `x=y; filename=example.txt` as if >> it had an unrecognized disposition type and should thus be handled as >> "attachment", which, say, Internet Explorer and Opera don't do, when >> you treat plain `filename=example.txt` as having no disposition type. > > Perhaps Julian would be willing to add this case to his test suite? > Silliness isn't one of the criteria I've applied. > ... Will do tomorrow. >> I can't really make heads or tails of the rest of your proposal, for >> instance, if you go by the processing rules already in the draft, you >> would not need to discuss quote marks, but you seem to have your own >> rules for processing parameters and parameter values, in which case >> you would need to discuss quote marks, but your proposal does not. > > It's possible I've screwed up handling quote marks. Do you have a > specific test case you're worried about? I was surprised as well that > I didn't need to mention quote marks. That's probably because Chrome doesn't handle quoted-string properly: <http://greenbytes.de/tech/tc2231/#attwithasciifnescapedchar> > ... Best regards, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 1 December 2010 23:20:15 UTC