- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@kiwi.ICS.UCI.EDU>
- Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 19:36:37 -0700
- To: Anders Edenbrandt <Anders.Edenbrandt@radio.ausys.se>
- cc: http-wg@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Actually, RFC 2616 should have said simply Characters other than those in the "reserved" set (see RFC 2396 [42]) are equivalent to their ""%" HEX HEX" encoding. The reason being that excluded characters will not appear in a valid URI, and thus it doesn't matter if encoded excluded characters might mistakenly be compared equal to their non-encoded character. Thanks for the report, ....Roy In message <C0E81C20AD21D311BDB200805FCCD9411C1B39@aunt9.ausys.se>, Anders Edenbrandt writes: > >Hello, > >In the latest HTTP standard (RFC 2616), in section 3.2.3 "URI Comparison", >it says: > Characters other than those in the "reserved" and "unsafe" sets (see > RFC 2396 [42]) are equivalent to their ""%" HEX HEX" encoding. > >However, RFC 2396 has no definition of a character set called "unsafe". >The former HTTP standard (RFC 2068) makes this definition: > > unsafe = CTL | SP | <"> | "#" | "%" | "<" | ">" > >Is this the character set you mean? Or is it all the characters mentioned >in section 2.4.3 "Excluded US-ASCII Characters" in RFC 2396? That is, >in addition to the characters above also the following: > > unwise = "{" | "}" | "|" | "\" | "^" | "[" | "]" | "`" > > >I would be grateful for a clarification on this point. > >Yours sincerely, > >Anders Edenbrandt, Ph.D. > >*** >Anders Edenbrandt >AU-System Radio AB >SE-223 70 Lund, SWEDEN >Phone: +46-46-286 32 36, Fax: +46-46-286 56 20 >Mobile: +46- 705-37 32 36 >mailto:Anders.Edenbrandt@radio.ausys.se , http://www.ausys.se
Received on Friday, 10 September 1999 19:41:10 UTC