LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 15.5

Help for MHTML Archives


MHTML Archives

MHTML Archives


View:

Next Message | Previous Message
Next in Topic | Previous in Topic
Next by Same Author | Previous by Same Author
Chronologically | Most Recent First
Proportional Font | Monospaced Font

Options:

Join or Leave MHTML
Reply | Post New Message
Search Archives


Subject: Re: More on wrongly(?) formatted urls
From: Larry Masinter <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:IETF working group on HTML in e-mail <[log in to unmask]>
Date:Fri, 22 Aug 1997 09:13:24 PDT
Content-Type:text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
Parts/Attachments

text/plain (22 lines)


1738 is being updated. In the real world, people are using all kinds of
characters as "reserved", and the truth is you're really taking a risk
if you encode something on your own that wasn't encoded.

In the interest of safety, I think you're better off *not* recommending
using %xx encoding as a way of making illegal URLs safer. But this
is still just implementation advice.

> I assume this means that any other character, if occuring in the value
> submitted to a mailer for a Content-Location, must be encoded either
> using the RFC 1738 encoding method or the RFC 2047 encoding method.

It is misleading to talk about "encoding a character using the
RFC 1738 encoding method", because the RFC 1738 encoding method
is not a character-by-character encoding. That is, you have to
look at the whole URL and the scheme and the context of the
character. RFC 2047 encoding, on the other hand, can be decided
character-by-character, because it is at a different layer.

Larry
--
http://www.parc.xerox.com/masinter

Back to: Top of Message | Previous Page | Main MHTML Page

Permalink



LISTSRV.NORDU.NET

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager