- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2010 22:47:33 +0200
- To: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
- CC: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 03.10.2010 22:30, Adam Barth wrote: > ... > Concretely, my proposal is that the specification should not forbid > user agents from %-decoding the value of the filename parameter. > Julian has agreed that neither Internet Explorer nor Chrome is going > to stop %-decoding the filename parameter anytime soon. Forbidding > user agent from processing these messages in this way is fiction. > ... Implementing %-unescaping here is a bug. I agree it's unlikely to disappear from IE and Chrome anytime soon, so a warning is probably a good idea. I do not believe we can do more than that, because (a) the 4 other UAs tested do the right thing, and (b) there's no other way to deliberately send filenames containing these character sequences. > Now, I'm fine with forbidding servers from generating %-encoded > values. In fact, I believe that would be desirable. However, just > because we forbid servers from generating the values does not mean > that we must also forbid user agents from consuming them. I'd be more than happy recommending something else, if there was a "something else" we can recommend. > ... > The problem is your change proposal focuses on uncovering the set of > messages with the same meaning in all semantics. While that is of > interest to servers (generators), that's not of particular interest to > user agent implementors, as explained before. Instead, user agent > implementors are interested in the largest set of messages generated > by at least one server that can be interpreted with a single semantic > theory. > ... I'm sure they are interested in that. But I bet they are also interested in - unambiguous parsing, - consistency, - code reuse (between header fields), - and compatibility with other UAs. C-D is a mess, we can all agree on this. RFC 5987 and this ID are an attempt to make things better. My main goal is to get to a situation where servers can emit C-D headers with filenames containing "arbitrary" characters from the Unicode character set (minus whitespace, control, path delims, whatnot) without having to do UA sniffing. To get there, we need IE/Chrome/Safari to implement RFC2231/5987, or invent something new everybody is willing to accept. So far I haven't seen a serious alternative proposal. Once everybody implements RFC 5987, broken support for "filename" just doesn't matter anymore, because you can always can use the new encoding ("filename*"). But unfortunately we aren't there yet. Best regards, Julian
Received on Sunday, 3 October 2010 20:48:08 UTC