- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 20:56:41 +0000
- To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
-------- In message <20150331182521.GF7183@1wt.eu>, Willy Tarreau writes: >> Third, are there *any* valid reasons to even allow other charsets >> than ISO-8859-1 or UTF-8 from 2015 forward ? > >Idem. And if we don't need to do more than that, then probably we >just need a boolean to say "this is not ISO-8859-1, hence this is >UTF-8" and make the encoding implicit by the sole presence of the >encoding tag (eg: the "*" or "=", I don't remember right now). In that case I could live with it being per field, because the signal could be a single character and we could probably dispense with the % encoding too. -- 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 Tuesday, 31 March 2015 20:57:08 UTC