W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2014

Re: draft-montenegro-httpbis-uri-encoding

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 12:04:35 +0100
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Gabriel Montenegro <Gabriel.Montenegro@microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <u4o2j95kbev72j486mne9qa60tjp84m8jg@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
* Mark Nottingham wrote:
>  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-montenegro-httpbis-uri-encoding-00

>What do people think about adopting this as a WG item, keeping in mind 
>that we can change it in process if there's some particular aspect you 
>don't like?

Use of not otherwise encoded non-textual binary data in 'http' URIs is
vanishingly rare, and use of character encodings other than UTF-8 will
only go down over time. So, the ideal situation would be that around
100% of all requests come with these two additional headers, telling
servers something they practically already know. That does not make a
lot of sense to me. And so far nobody has explained how clients would
determine the encoding used in addresses, outside a narrowly confined
area. I think we would be better served with some "best practise" form
of document instead of the proposed headers.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Tuesday, 25 March 2014 11:05:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:25 UTC