On 19 Jul 2006, at 15:30, Ivan Sagalaev wrote:
> I just thought that may be they shouldn't. If META is a reflection of > CGI's environment that is derived from HTTP environment that is > essentially in byte strings then I think META being unicode is may be > useless and misleading. > > Instead the META can be declared as a low-level stuff that is needed > only in custom cases. But we also have a public API: request.GET, > request.POST, request.method. This API reflects the user data > (urldecoded params, etc.) and should be unicode. > > What do you think of this idea? I'm still on the fence. I agree that it makes sense for META to use bytestrings, but I'd really like the bias to be towards unicode strings where ever we can have them to reduce the confusion that might stem from having both bytestrings and unicode strings mixed together. I don't see any harm in META using unicode strings, whereas if it were to use bytestrings our documentation ends up being that little bit more confusing (we can't just claim everything is a unicode string). If there are any practical disadvantages to META containing unicode strings then it should definitely use byte strings - but I'm not yet convinced that the disadvantages exist. I'm more than ready to be convinced otherwise though. Cheers, Simon --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
