Thank you for the enlightenment.

Olivier

> It's a good suggestion, and it's come up before, but javascript just
>> doesn't have a reliable urlencode function.
>
> encode() chokes on double byte chars (the first version of
> flashobject
> used encode() by default, but was later removed due to the double
> byte problem)
>
> so i would have liked to replace it with encodeURIcomponent(), but
> that
> doesn't have good enough support throughout the browsers i wanted to
> support. at some point in the future i'm sure i'll reevaluate this,
> but for now i'd rather leave it out.
>
> writing a custom URLencode() function i don't really like because it
> adds bloat to the script that many people will not use much.
>
> which is why it's set at the current state, where you have the
> option of using encode(), which will work in most cases, or
> encodeURLcomponent()
> if you dont' mine cutting out older browsers, or doing server side
> encoding as you mention.
>
> so that's the history behind that - bob ippolito actually put the
> encode() back in for his flashobject implementation that is in the
> JSAN
> library, but just marked it with a comment about the double byte
> char problem.



_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org

Reply via email to