Re: [whatwg/url] Percent-decode more stuff? (#87)

@annevk: It seems to me like you MUST take such a stance for ensuring interoperability—defining a percent-encoding mechanism without defining a percent-decoding normalization is begging for problems. RFC 3986 avoids them by requiring "%" to be followed by a pair of hexadecimal digits (allowing decoding of every "%" after splitting on separators), but what you're proposing would permit compliant proxies that equate "/-" vs. "/%2D" vs. "/%2d" (i.e., the proxies that already exist) to thwart _also_-compliant servers that do not.

It'd be like ECMAScript engines disagreeing on whether `"A"`, `"\x41"`, and `"\u0041"` represent the same string, or some accepting `"\"` as `"\\"`.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/url/issues/87#issuecomment-257343787