- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 21:20:44 +1000
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Ian, I'm more than happy to respond to a substantive technical issue that you bring up, but expressing concern without conveying details isn't helping me do that. Can you be more explicit? What problems do you foresee? Thanks, On 30/09/2009, at 9:22 PM, Ian Hickson wrote: > On Wed, 30 Sep 2009, Julian Reschke wrote: >> Ian Hickson wrote: >>> On Wed, 30 Sep 2009, Julian Reschke wrote: >>>> Ian Hickson wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Seems reasonable, though I am still skeptical as to the use of >>>>>>> the title* feature in practice. It seems better to me to just >>>>>>> have one title attribute, in one language, and to upgrade HTTP >>>>>>> to support UTF-8 in headers. >>>>>> >>>>>> That's already been discussed extensively, and that's not the >>>>>> direction things are going in (certainly for pre-existing >>>>>> headers like Link). >>>>> >>>>> Fair enough. Is there a test suite I can look at or some >>>>> implementations of this feature so I can see how it works in >>>>> practice? >>>> >>>> I have tests that check support for RFC2231-style encoding for the >>>> filename parameter in the Content-Disposition header, see >>>> <http://greenbytes.de/tech/tc2231/>. >>>> >>>> As far as I can tell, the subset used in Mark's draft is supported >>>> (and has been for many years) by Firefox and Opera. >>> >>> It's not the encoding I'm concerned about; it's the UI. >> >> What does the UI have to do with the character encoding used in HTTP? > > Nothing. It's the multi-language aspect of the feature I'm concerned > about. > > -- > Ian Hickson U+1047E ) > \._.,--....,'``. fL > http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _ > \ ;`._ ,. > Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'-- > (,_..'`-.;.' -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 30 September 2009 11:21:32 UTC