- From: Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
- Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 21:28:51 +0900
- To: Fred Akalin <akalin@google.com>
- CC: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2013/08/14 8:01, Fred Akalin wrote: > That opens another can of worms, which is Unicode string comparison. > > If not ASCII, I'd rather have header values be arbitrary octet strings and > for string equality to be byte-wise; then you can put UTF-8 in there if you > wish. The semantics of comparisons of header field values will depend on the specific header field. A field with a date is compared differently from a field with e.g. a domain name or an URI or whatever else. And using UTF-8 doesn't exclude using bitwise equality, if that makes sense for some header. But saying data is binary and then having each header have to define how to use charaters on top of that is really a bad idea. Just make it UTF-8, and be done with it. Regards, Martin.
Received on Friday, 16 August 2013 12:29:46 UTC