- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 21:02:24 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13154 --- Comment #23 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> --- > The problem with comma-delimited microsyntax for multiple values is that the > comma is a restricted character and so will be percent-encoded. Actually comma isn't percent-encoded, but more importantly, a server should always apply the query-decoding logic, because there's nothing semantically different between http://example.com?a=A+ ...and: http://example.com?%61=%41%20 > This makes deducing the individual entries a lot more difficult than if they > are already split before encoding, a new microsyntax must be incorporated > and decoded instead of just fetching a value by key from the query/form data > set. If you have the query/form data set already decoded such that you can just fetch its value, then it'll already be %-decoded, and you can just split on commas. > This problem is excaserbated when viewed with email (as oppsed to a purely > numeric range value) as example. I assume this might be one reason why the > email syntax has been restricted over the RFCs. Not sure what you mean here. Posting the form by e-mail would just have something like: range=1,54 ...which seems quite readable to me. > The <input type="file" multiple> uses the same query/form encoding as > <select>, this a preferable standard approach. Can the same implementation > also be applied to 'range' and 'email'? type=file is a special case. It has hard-coded logic all over the place, it can't be set to a value when you create the form, and it generates attachments in the output. This is quite different from anything else and not really a model I think we should follow. The other problem with using multiple values in the type=file style is what happens with cases like this: Choose the ranges you want to cover: <input name=ranges type=range multiple> <input name=ranges type=range multiple> <input name=ranges type=range multiple> <input name=ranges type=range multiple> (button to add more...) With the comma-based proposal, you end up with: ranges=1,4&ranges=6,9&rangles=14,44&ranges=80,90 ...but with the type=file-style system you end up with: ranges=1&ranges=4&ranges=6&ranges=9&rangles=14&ranges=44&ranges=80&ranges=90 ...which, while still _technically_ unambiguous, is much less obvious and easier to screw up. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 10 October 2013 21:02:28 UTC