W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-mobileok-checker@w3.org > May 2007

RE: Raw HTTP Headers

From: Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 09:47:38 +0100
Message-ID: <C8FFD98530207F40BD8D2CAD608B50B4336079@mtldsvr01.DotMobi.local>
To: <public-mobileok-checker@w3.org>

> How does it modify the headers -- just trimming whitespace?
> My view on this is that we should record the entire response,
> verbatim, in a CDATA section, Base64 encoded per EARL (or not), and
> then feel free to embrace all kinds of normalization and parsing in
> the moki document.
> You've got the original stashed away for the record, and then the
> useful, parsed version in the moki document.
> So: no I'd rather not be bothered by this.

I'm sorry, I don't understand, you seem to be at odds with yourself on
this. You both don't want to do it and want to have the verbatim record?

> PS but if you spotted chapter and verse from the HTTP spec and the
> client seems to not follow it exactly, I'm happy to file a bug report
> and/or submit the patch, separately. Givin' back to the community and
> all that...

Yes, there does seem to be some minor stuff.

> Sean
> On 5/24/07, Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi> wrote:
> >
> > We are currently assuming that moki will record the raw HTTP
> >
> > HttpClient in Jakarta Commons doesn't do that. The question is, do
> > want to modify it so it does, or can we live without it.
> >
> > In favour of living without it is, well, that it's no work. In
favour of
> > having it, is that we are closer to being able to resolve questions
> > mal-formed headers.
> >
> > A quick review of the code shows that the headers are parsed in
> > HttpParser, and that even if you have a so-called wire trace enabled
> > this just serialises the parsed headers (in HttpMethodBase).
> >
> > readLine is the method of HttpParser that we'd want to change to
> > the raw data, I think. A trivial change I think. Though not sure I'd
> > know how to go about doing it.
> >
> > Jo
> >
> > PS Incidentally, if you are interested you will see that in
> > the treatment of lines starting with space or tab appears to be
> > Firstly because it allows a whitespace only line to end the headers,
> > rather than an empty line, and secondly because I think it messes up
> > handling of lines starting with space or tab - which are supposed to
> > continuations of the previous header. If there was no previous
> > that is an error, I think, which it does not detect.
> >
> >
Received on Friday, 25 May 2007 08:48:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:21:18 UTC