- From: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
- Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 13:33:32 +0200 (MET DST)
- To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@kiwi.ICS.UCI.EDU>
- Cc: koen@win.tue.nl, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Roy T. Fielding:
>
>Clarification ...
>
>> Many content authors have managed to avoid the confirmation dialog
>> problem by using GETs for form submission instead of safe POSTs.
>> However, this escape is not possible for forms
>>
>> a) which are (sometimes) used to submit large amounts of data
>> b) which are (sometimes) used to submit data in a charset other
>> than ISO-8859-1.
>>
>> Case b) will be the increasingly common; web internationalization [2]
>> makes it necessary to use the POST method for form submission.
>
>This is not true.
Quoting from section 5.2 of [2] (draft-ietf-html-i18n-05.txt):
The best solution is to use the "multipart/form-data" media type
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
described in [RFC1867] with the POST method of form submission.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Do you disagree with draft-ietf-html-i18n-05.txt, or with my
interpretation of it? I can't really tell from your comments.
I have not read all of draft-ietf-html-i18n-05.txt, so I may be
missing something, but the quote above seems quite clear. POSTs are
the route draft-ietf-html-i18n-05.txt seems to be taking, and
draft-ietf-html-i18n-05.txt is approved as a proposed standard.
My proposal attempts to identify and clear away an obstacle to the
deployment of draft-ietf-html-i18n-05.txt. If you can convince me it
does not, I will retract my proposal.
> ...Roy T. Fielding
Koen.
Received on Thursday, 10 October 1996 04:39:15 UTC