On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 02:41:19PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> writes: > > 2012/4/25 Michael Glaesemann <g...@seespotcode.net>: > >> Sounds like a great idea for a PGXN module. > > > it is one variant - but with support some web technologies - XML, > > JSON, I prefer this in core. Urlcode is one the most used code on > > world now - implementation is simple - and it can be well integrated > > with decode, encode functions. > > Embedding that in encode/decode sounds to me like a pretty horrid idea, > actually, unless I misunderstand what you are talking about. URL > encoding is a text-to-text transformation, no? If so, it doesn't fit > into encode/decode, which presume a binary (bytea) decoded form. People > would be needing to do entirely bogus text/bytea coercions to use > such an implementation.
I don't understand the actual proposal here, but urlencoding encodes octets as quoted us-ascii. So, its not really text to text, but bytes to US-ASCII and US-ASCII to bytes. AIUI, a unicode character has no well specified urlencoding. A utf-8 encoded unicode character can be said to have an urlencoding since we can come up a stream of octets to urlencode. Garick -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
