- From: Charles Lindsey <chl@clerew.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 12:27:32 -0000
- To: Julien ÉLIE <julien@trigofacile.com>
- Cc: URI <uri@w3.org>
I am forwarding tjis from Julian Élie. who seems to have difficulty posting to this list. My own comments are added. On Sat, 09 Jan 2010 20:16:36 -0000, Julien ÉLIE <julien@trigofacile.com> wrote: > Hi Bob, > > [I hope this mail will reach the mailing-list. I do not understand > why I cannot post -- I receive mails from the list, but I never had > the one for the archive approval system.] > >>>> For certain, you should percent-encode that "%" as well, but I'm >>>> inclined to believe you should percent encode the "^`{|}" also. I >>>> think this would be the correct normalized form: >>>> news:foo@bar.!%23$%25&'*+%2F=%3F%5E%60%7B%7C%7D.example >>> >>> I have just tested to write that line in IE8 and it works fine: >> >> I would argue that IE8 *doesn't* work fine. >> >>> ARTICLE <foo@bar.!#$%&'*+/=?^`{|}.example> is sent. >>> >>> However, with Firefox 3.5.6, the Windows file explorer or >>> Windows Mail (a newsreader), it fails: >>> >>> ARTICLE <foo@bar.!%23$%25&'*+%2F=%3F%5E%60%7B%7C%7D.example> >>> >>> is sent. >> >> I consider that to be correct behavior. > > Then that's a problem because you will never be able to read > that article. All you will receive is a 430 error code > (message-ID not found). > A news server expect a real message-ID, not en encoded message-ID. Sure. That example was entirely artificial regarding what happens in the Real World, and I doubt those characters will ever appear in real message-ids; but the specification needs to get it right, just in case. > > A message-ID is parsed as a byte string by a news server. > > >>>> However, I believe virtually all URI parsers will interpret >>>> "news:foo@bar.!%23$%25&'*+%2F=%3F^`{|}.example" as intended. >>> >>> Works fine in IE8 but Firefox, the Windows file explorer >>> and Windows Mail still re-encode it: >> >> When I said "URI parsers" I specifically meant the parser itself — as >> in, the parser won't misinterpret some component as something other >> than what it is, and the value of all components will be available to >> the application. As Martin said, those characters aren't really >> supposed to show up in a URI and have to be encoded. Browsers that >> figure out what you meant and encode the URI before sending it are >> following Postel's law and, in my opinion, doing the right thing. > > I do not know what browsers are supposed to do but if that is the > right thing, then it does not work with the NNTP protocol. But nobody is expecting it to be sent to NNTP in that form. Whoever/whatever interprets that URI (possibly a browser) should decode it, then open an NNTP dialog with the NNTP server, and then send the article with the funny characters already decoded. Perhaps I should mention that in the RFC. > > > When Joseph said it worked fine in his newsreader (Unison), what > was the ARTICLE command actually sent to the news server? > > It MUST be: > > ARTICLE <foo@bar.!#$%&'*+/=?^`{|}.example> > > Otherwise, the newsreader is broken. > > > If someone wants to test message-IDs, I can create relevant articles > with these message-IDs locally on my news server, so that you could > test to retrieve them. (I can also post them to a worldwide group > like misc.test if you have access to it and prefer your usual news > server.) > -- Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------ Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl Email: chl@clerew.man.ac.uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5
Received on Sunday, 10 January 2010 12:28:02 UTC