- From: Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 17:03:39 -0600
- To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > -------- > In message <CACuKZqHMQdktfOU3PJC=X-G8R=BQ40bhFJw=ZTfeSpem9L=GEw@mail.gmail.com> > , Zhong Yu writes: >>On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 4:24 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote: > >>But how does the 2 ends agree on which encoding to use? It might be >>easier if HTTP just dictate UTF-8. > > But this is a semantic question, I've been told in no uncertain > terms that all that was settled in HTTPbis, and that HTTP/2 is > only about transport, and that reopening semantic questions was I think that HTTP is supposed to transport "characters" in headers, not "octets". So if we enlarge the legal character set by a wider encoding scheme, can we define that change as a transport issue? > Not To Be Done. > > Did I misunderstand that ? > > -- > Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 > phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 > FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe > Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Sunday, 10 February 2013 23:04:06 UTC