W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: Delta Compression and UTF-8 Header Values

From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 10:24:15 +0000
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
cc: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <79780.1360491855@critter.freebsd.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
In message <51176C95.1040308@gmx.de>, Julian Reschke writes:

>> This is why I keep asking people where _exactly_ it is they want
>> the unicode to go in the HTTP/2 protocol.  So far I fail to detect
>> a clear answer...
>1) Filenames in Content-Disposition

These only have meaning to the ultimate destinations, and if their
filesystems don't support UTF-8, they'll have to do $something anyway.

Nobody in the HTTP/2 protocol-chain can do anything but treat this
as an opaque bytestring.

>2) non-ASCII characters in HTTP auth credentials


>3) title parameters in Link header fields


The UTF-8 Questions imply does not apply at the protocol layer,
it only applies to the semantic interpretation at the ends of
the HTTP/2 protocol connection.

Or to put it more precisely:  I can see no place where an
HTTP/2 intermediate without a semantic role will ever need
to know about normalizing UTF-8 strings.

Agree ?

Since we, presumably, split HTTP into a transport and semantic
part in HTTPbis, and since HTTP/2 is not supposed to change
the semantics, why are we even discussing "UTF-8 in HTTP/2" ?

Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Sunday, 10 February 2013 10:24:38 UTC

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