W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > October to December 2001

RE: Content-Type / charset in RFC2518, deltaV and ACL specs

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 20:05:10 +0200
To: "Clemm, Geoff" <gclemm@rational.com>, "Webdav WG" <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCCEKHDCAA.julian.reschke@gmx.de>
I think making it "xxx" is an excellent idea.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff
> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 7:59 PM
> To: Webdav WG
> Subject: RE: Content-Type / charset in RFC2518, deltaV and ACL specs
>
>
> I think there are good arguments on either side, but I personally
> believe that the risk of someone blindly copying the example and
> leaving out a needed charset parameter or an encoding attribute are
> higher than the risk of someone using a non-UTF-8 encoding, but leaving
> in the UTF-8 charset parameter and encoding attributes from the example.
>
> But I don't feel strongly about this, so if there is working
> group consensus
> that these charset/encoding info should be stripped from the examples
> (or have their values be replaced by "xxxx"), I'm happy to make
> that change
> to the DeltaV spec (assuming that consensus is reached before the
> author 48 hour period has expired :-).
>
> Cheers,
> Geoff
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 1:36 PM
> To: Webdav WG
> Subject: RE: Content-Type / charset in RFC2518, deltaV and ACL specs
>
>
> Geoff,
>
> maybe it's obvious for people who constantly deal with these issues, but
> many people blindly copy from examples, not knowing exactly what
> they do...
> Of course properly declaring the charset is a Good Thing (and often
> necessary), but then maybe the spec should come with a warning that the
> charset declarations in the examples are just that -- examples -- and must
> match the *actual* encoding used for the request/response bodies.
>
> For instance:
>
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <town>Münster</town>
>
> may look completely innocent -- until it appears within something which
> actually is encoded in a different (and incompatible) charset. I
> guess this
> mail will be transferred in some ISO encoding, so the XML
> fragment wouldn't
> parse when given byte-by-byte to an XML parser, right?.
>
> The examples in the specs generally don't need anything outside the ASCII
> range, so maybe it would be wiser to leave out the encoding declarations
> (and have a separate paragraph in RFC2518++ explain the issue).
>
> (sorry for cross-posting to "both" lists).
>
> Julian
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 6:54 PM
> > To: Webdav WG; ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: Content-Type / charset in RFC2518, deltaV and ACL specs
> >
> >
> > Actually, section 3.6 states that a "value" is either a "token" or
> > a "quoted-string", so the examples in 2518 are syntactically valid.
> > But that doesn't mean that they are acceptable to common
> implementations,
> > so it's a fair question.
> >
> > There is time to strip off the quotes in the DeltaV spec in the final
> > editing pass, but that is likely to be soon, so if anyone feels strongly
> > about this, please let me know ASAP.
> >
> > I don't follow your rationale for why examples in specs should not
> > contain encoding information.  An example is supposed to accurately
> > reflect what the client should send and expect to receive, and a client
> > should send encoding information in a charset parameter in the
> > Content-Type header.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Geoff
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Julian F. Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@greenbytes.de]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 11:20 AM
> > To: Webdav WG; ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> > Subject: Content-Type / charset in RFC2518, deltaV and ACL specs
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just noticed that in their examples, all these specs specify:
> >
> > 	Content-type: text/xml; charset="utf-8"
> >
> > However, as far as I understand RFC2616 (section 3.6 and
> section 3.7), and
> > >from experience when setting the encoding in Java servlets, it
> should be
> >
> > 	Content-type: text/xml; charset=utf-8
> >
> > (so the value is not quoted).
> >
> > In general, I think it really doesn't make sense to specify
> character sets
> > in specs (unless the spec is talking about encodings, of
> course). The spec
> > contains characters after all (not an octet stream). Of course this also
> > affects XML declarations in the specs.
> >
> > Julian
> >
> >
>
Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2001 14:04:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:58 GMT