- From: Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
- Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2012 11:27:48 +0900
- To: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
- CC: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2012/08/06 8:22, Adrien de Croy wrote: > > personally I see little value in allowing a "safe" character to be > encoded with %, and specify it has no semantic meaning (that it is > encoded rather than "native") > > Why not simply deprecate such things for 2.0, and when it comes to > putting together a 1.1 message from a 2.0 message, it needs encoding at > that stage, and at that stage, there's only 1 allowed way to do it, e.g. > safe chars MUST NOT be %-encoded etc. It's possible for HTTP to forbid such useless %-encoding. Please note however that URIs (and IRIs) allow it, and HTTP can't change that. Regards, Martin.
Received on Monday, 6 August 2012 02:28:20 UTC