W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2016

Re: draft-ietf-httpbis-header-structure-00, unicode range

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2016 08:59:58 -0500
Cc: Ilari Liusvaara <ilariliusvaara@welho.com>, Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>, HTTP working group mailing list <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@varnish-cache.org>
Message-Id: <6D8F0C71-BF83-438E-AF6E-4D7CA500F2B0@mnot.net>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>

> On 13 Dec 2016, at 4:43 pm, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:
> 
> --------
> In message <20161213175419.GA7943@LK-Perkele-V2.elisa-laajakaista.fi>, Ilari Li
> usvaara writes:
> 
>>> 3.  HTTP/1 Serialization of HTTP Header Common Structure
>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-header-structure-00#section-3
> 
> 
>> Well, that production lists UTF8-4, which is presumably 4-byte UTF-8
>> sequences, and all valid ones are astral plane codepoints.
> 
> My impression was that UTF8 and 8-bit clean HTTP/1 got shot down
> in previous discussions, but I left UTF8 here for now, pending a
> more structured decision making on this.
> 
> I see us having four options, in my order of preference:
> 
> 1) Forbid Unicode in headers.
> 
> 2) Take UTF8 out and leave all (non-ASCII) unicode to the \uxxxx
>   escape mechanism.
> 
> 3) Leave UTF8 in, and make it clear that it may or may not work, so
>   that people can use it in controlled environments.
> 
> 4) Leave UTF8 in, and specify how to indicate/negotiate if it can be used.
> 
>> astral planes (and I hope the escape system there would be more sane
>> than the one JSON has...)
> 
> Any suggestions ?

When you say "take out / leave in" above, that's only in the context of the HTTP/1 serialisation, correct?



--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
Received on Sunday, 25 December 2016 14:00:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 25 December 2016 14:00:32 UTC