- From: Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 16:49:01 -0600
- To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 4:24 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote: > 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. But how does the 2 ends agree on which encoding to use? It might be easier if HTTP just dictate UTF-8. > >>2) non-ASCII characters in HTTP auth credentials > > Same. > >>3) title parameters in Link header fields > > Same. > > 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 22:49:29 UTC