Re: XHR LC comments

Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Tue, 27 May 2008 18:12:25 +0200, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> 
> wrote:
>> * Julian Reschke wrote:
>>> Yes, the I18N problems of Basic Authentication need to be fixed, but XHR
>>> is not the right place to do it.
>>
>> Agreed, I've repeatedly suggested to simply point out it is up to the
>> scheme to define how the unicode sequences are encoded in the message.
> 
> This is what XMLHttpRequest says. It just has UTF-8 as fallback in case 
> the authentication scheme doesn't define anything. (Which per Julian 
> shouldn't affect this case so I'm not sure what the issue is.)

Well, you yourself claimed that the defaulting applies to Basic; and 
that XHR implementations use UTF-8.

So are you disagreeing that this is confusing, if you were confused 
yourself just a few hours ago?

Can you give an example of an authentication scheme to which the 
defaulting *would* apply?

BR, Julian