- From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 09:38:02 +0200
- To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 12:32:07AM -0700, James M Snell wrote: > >> For that matter, can we allow extended characters in all the headers > >> and use UTF-8 as the default encoding. > > > > It's not clear that we're going to be able to do that, because it requires knowledge of the headers to translate between the different encodings. The benefit would be relatively small for a LOT of work. > > > > It may be because it's after midnight and I really should be getting > some sleep, but i don't quite follow what you're saying about > requiring knowledge of the headers to translate between the different > encodings. Some header fields might very well contain some data that are not to be considered as text and will not be utf-8 encoded. So it might be a real pain to know what must be transcoded and what must not be. This is the reason why in websocket we have implemented a frame type from the beginning (binary/text). Regards, Willy
Received on Friday, 27 April 2012 07:38:36 UTC