- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@yahoo-inc.com>
- Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 14:04:07 -0700
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: www-archive@w3.org
Fair enough. BTW, the encoding rules don't seem to account for plus ("+") characters in the input, with the result that they're effectively collapsed into whitespace. Is that intentional? Cheers, On 2006/09/28, at 12:20 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > * Mark Nottingham wrote: >> One immediate area of concern; some other uses of the "x-" prefix are >> optional, and it may be that some software is out there that >> recognises "application/x-www-form-urlencoded" and "application/www- >> form-urlencoded". >> >> Have you looked into this, or considered using a more distinct >> subtype to avoid such problems? > > PHP5 and CGI.pm do not apply any special treatment to entities of this > type, and if I remember correctly, the same applies to JSP and .NET / > their frameworks. There may be well some scripts that "recognize" the > type in some way, and process entities of this type in some > incompatible > way, but I don't think this poses any problem. In order to pose a > problem you would need a situation where > > * application a generates www-form-urlencoded enties in some in- > compatible form > > * application b processes www-form-urlencoded enties in some in- > compatible way > > * neither a nor b can be upgraded > > * yet either or both wants to use the "new" www-form-urlencoded > format > > I think this can be ruled out or at least ignored. > -- > Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http:// > bjoern.hoehrmann.de > Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http:// > www.bjoernsworld.de > 68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http:// > www.websitedev.de/ > > -- Mark Nottingham mnot@yahoo-inc.com
Received on Friday, 29 September 2006 21:06:41 UTC