W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2012

Re: [xhr] statusText is underdefined

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 17:00:41 -0600
Message-ID: <CACQ=j+d2jb7PMG+HNXPaz5py91_0bgL=gJhy+E-YK9VMKvVw0Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:

> On 3/27/12 3:36 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>
>> On 3/27/12 3:35 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
>>
>>> The TEXT rule is only used for descriptive field contents and values
>>> that are not intended to be interpreted by the message parser. Words
>>> of *TEXT MAY contain characters from character sets other than ISO-
>>> 8859-1 [22] only when encoded according to the rules of RFC 2047
>>> [14].
>>>
>>
>> I believe that does not actually match server reality, unfortunately...
>>
>
> And one more thing.  Even the text you quoted does not define what happens
> if the rules from RFC 2047 are followed incorrectly (e.g. declaring a UTF-8
> encoding but then having byte sequences that are not valid UTF-8 in the
> data).  The behavior needs to actually be defined here for all values of
> the status text, whichever spec that happens in.


Since there are so may places in XHR, HTML5, etc., that interact with HTTP
semantics, it would be better to define this in one place for all uses, and
not attempt to redefine at every place where conversion to DOMString
occurs. DRY.
Received on Tuesday, 27 March 2012 23:01:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:50 GMT