- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2022 08:49:06 -0800
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
FWIW, there is nothing technical preventing a requirement that sf fields support UTF-8 by default. The charset limitations for HTTP were for the request-line, response-line, and existing unstructured header fields. I don't know of parsers that block UTF-8 in header field-line parsing (before the value is looked at), since that would interfere with non-standard fields. There are some WAFs that might be weird about that, but we can say the same about any feature of HTTP. Interpretation of the field value after it is parsed is expected to be defined by the field name, which can be defined once for sf-bis and I don't think anyone (other than the authors) would care whether that is ASCII or UTF-8. Of course, there's the other can of worms about whether UTF-8 is now sufficient to satisfy everyone (and I do mean everyone). *shrug* ....Roy
Received on Friday, 2 December 2022 16:49:33 UTC