- From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 13:36:33 +0100
On 03/24/11 07:14, Ian Hickson wrote: > On Wed, 23 Mar 2011, Julien Chaffraix wrote: >> the EventSource specification states the current content-type header >> should match the string "text/event-stream". However following some >> bugs opened inside the WebKit project [1], we relaxed the content-type >> check to ignore any specified charset as it confused developers and >> can potentially break existing servers that automatically send a >> charset as part of the response [2]. >> >> We are currently revisiting our approach and our current take would be >> to allow a mime-type of "text/event-stream" with an optional >> charset="UTF-8". No other charset would be allowed as UTF-8 is the >> only encoding supported by the standard. > That seems like a reasonable compromise given the legacy servers. > >> We are not set-up on the best way to fix this and would like to reach >> a consensus before correcting our existing behavior so that the >> specification is clarified on this point. Also note that the same >> problem exists for the application cache [3]. > Thanks for bringing it up. I'll update the spec at some point to mention > that these MIME types are to handled such that a "charset" parameter with > a value that is an ASCII case-insensitive match for the string "utf-8" > should be ignored in determining whether the types are recognised. RFC 2046 section 4.1.2 seems to indicate that subtypes of "text" can specify that they don't have a "charset" parameter, but if they do, it has to have the same meaning as for text/plain. It seems from the cited experience that some implementors have taken this to mean that "it is always harmless to send a charset parameter". I think the spec might want to state that one can reject all values except "utf-8" (case insensitive) - if a parser gets something that someone passed through a general transcoder and relabelled using the "charset" parameter, it seems likely that the parser won't want to deal with the possibly bogus result of parsing the content. I hope there aren't any such bogosities around.... >> [1] https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45372 >> [2] https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45372#c30 >> [3] http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/offline.html#writing-cache-manifests
Received on Thursday, 24 March 2011 05:36:33 UTC