- From: Geoffrey Sneddon <foolistbar@googlemail.com>
- Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:27:15 +0000
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 28 Oct 2007, at 18:32, Julian Reschke wrote: > Geoffrey Sneddon wrote: >> Hi, >> Earlier today I posted <http://gsnedders.com/http-entity-tags- >> confusion>, and having discussed it with various people, have >> concluded that it'd be best addressed by RFC 2616bis. >> In short, the post raises the issue of the meaning of double >> quotes. If you parse them out, you end up with Etag: W/"a" and >> Etag: "W/a" equivalent. If you don't, you can end up with >> character sets such as "UTF-8" (i.e., including the quotation >> marks) in headers like Content-Type: text/plain;charset="UTF-8". >> What is the expected behaviour for quoted-string (or, if need be, >> for each and every specification that uses quoted-string)? >> ... > > The simple answer is: the double quotes are part of the entity tag. > So a response header such as > > ETag: x > > would simply be invalid and should be ignored. I am aware — but how is the receiving end meant to deal with them? Is it meant to keep the quotation marks around any quoted-string, even when that therefore results in non-exist things like a character set called "UTF-8" (with quotes)? Or does the behaviour need to be specific to each and every use of quoted-string need to have it defined separately? - Geoffrey.
Received on Sunday, 28 October 2007 19:27:29 UTC