DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31201] - Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-18 13:09 --- I have thought about this some more and decided that on balance the patch should be committed. The patch has been applied to TC4.1.x and ported to TC5.5.x -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31201] - Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201 Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-10 21:02 --- 1a. If you are worried about performance - precompile. If you want ease of replacement - don't. You can't have it both ways. 1b. Please state which section of the spec you believe tomcat is not compliant with. Without this, I can't invetsigate further. 3. What about different encodings across different webapps on the same server? There are solutions for this issue with the current versions of tomact. My concern about the proposed patch, that it encourages non-portable coding, remains. I am leaving this as REOPENED for now but I am leaning towards resolving it as WONTFIX. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31201] - Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201 Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-11 02:46 --- 1a.No I can't. So, I need this patch is committed. 1b.Please see API spec of RequestDispatcher#include method. (Because jsp:include action will be converted into this method.) This method must be able to handle any resource(such as a servlet, HTML file, or JSP file). But I feel like you said that because Tomcat cannot handle HTML file correctly, you ask to convert HTML file into JSP file. Isn't it right? 3.It can be resolved by defining DefaultServlet on each web app. If this patch is committed, we can separate web app from environment(locale) before fixing JSP spec. If you don't set file.encoding property, Tomcat will handle it just like former. So I believe there will be no demerit at all. If you say that property of i18n depending on container is a problem, see javaEncoding property of JspServlet. This property is also depend on the container, and assume that ALL JSP files for all webapps have the same encoding. Do you think that javaEncoding property is also a problem? Do you mean that it is not a problem, current Tomcat changes its handling by environments? I believe that this patch will be help for i18n problems, as other properties. Regards, Takayuki Kaneko - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31201] - Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201 Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-09 09:29 --- 1. Converting HTML files into JSPs has following problems. - Since the JSP compile is needed, a performance may become a problem. - HTML files must be included correctly in JSP spec. I think requiring converting HTML into JSP means not fulfilling specification. 2.file.encoding option does not operate depending on the version of JVM. 1.1 OK 1.2 NG 1.3 - 1.4.1 OK 1.4.2 NG file.encoding is determined by default locale at the time of JVM execution. I recommend you to see the following page. http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=4163515 3. The best solution for including HTML files of multiple encodings is changing the JSP spec. First of all, a browser cannot display if multiple encodings are contained in 1 page. In this case, in a HTML file, you should use comprehensive encodings, such as UTF8. However, do you want to use UTF8 as default locale? This patch can separate encodings of default locale and web app. This patch extends options without any undesireble effects. Other options are still effective even if this patch is accepted. reagrds, Takayuki Kaneko - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31201] - Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201 Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-09 11:19 --- 1. If performance is an issue, pre-compile your JSPs. If you can quote the part of the spec tomcat isn't following and the patch addresses this issue I'll commit it. However, having read the spec, and the errata, I believe tomcat is spec compliant. 2. I wasn't aware of this. Thanks for pointing this out. This is clearly not an option. 3. I think you mis-understood me. I was not trying to address one file with multiple encodings. My point is that your patch assumes (as does the current tomcat code) that ALL static files for all webapps will have the same encoding. Is this sufficient to address your i18n issues? Is it not possible to have one webapp with html files using one encoding and one webapp with thml files using a different one? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31201] - Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201 Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-09 16:43 --- 1.pre-compile is a good solution, but the sequence of replacing is complicate without stopping the web app while Tomcat is running. In a HTML file, I just need to replace it. It is much simple. I think your saying is not compliant the spec. If converting HTML into JSP is required, then HTML files can not be included. 3.My point is that it will be not necessary to consider the different static file encodings within the same web app. As having stated above, the problem of displaying still remains, there is no solution for a such web app in the present JSP specification. And there is no solution for even one static file encoding under present Tomcat. Takayuki Kaneko - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31201] - Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201 Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-07 21:33 --- I am still not happy with the portability implications of this. I still think it would be better for the 'fix' to be part of the application (and hence be portable) rather than part of the container (not portable and may require changes to app between containers depending on how each handles this). That being said, if all other options are inappropriate then I am prepared to consider this patch. Therefore I'd would appreciate it you would consider the following options. 1. I understand that some developers want to include HTML directly. However, given that this has i18n problems and i18n is obviously important to you why not tell your developers that they can't do this and should convert to JSPs? It is a change to the file name, adding a encoding directive and changing references from xxx.html to xxx.jsp. This would be trivial to automate. 2. How about using -Dfile.encoding=... at the JVM level? 3. The patch (and option 2 above) assumes that every file has the same encoding. Is this always the case? Might different files in different apps have different encodings? If so, you could specify a modified version of the default servlet in your web application to handle .html files. With this option you could even handle different static file encodings within the same web app. This option would give you a lot of flexibility (which may or may not be useful to you). - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31201] - Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201 Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-05 06:27 --- There are, however, a number of alternative approaches that are spec compliant and are hence container neutral. I knew. However these approaches could not include HTML direct. We should convert HTML to JSP or use escaped character for non iso-8859-1 characters. Some of the people want include HTML direct. Then, this becomes problem. You said I feed back JCP. It's really right, but imagin, how long we wait to resolve the problem and does tomcat never have tomcat specific functions? Could you see the number of vote for this bug? I'm disappointment for your i18n and l10n attitude. I posted i18n and l10n patch in the past but it took _6 month_ that tomcat commiter took my patch. I recommend you to provide temporary solution since release Tomcat 6.0 again. bye, Takashi - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31201] - Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201 Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|WONTFIX | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-05 14:37 --- Although I think that correcting specification is the right approach, there is no solution in the present JSP specification. Therefore the problem should be coped with by a container. When not applying this patch, Tomcat depends on default encoding of Java VM to include of a HTML file. Since Web application depends by environment strongly, it will be the worst situation if you consider the portability which you say. If there are already many properties which are valuable and depend on the container, I suggest this patch should be treated as one of them. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31201] - Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201 Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-02 14:33 --- The default encoding for included pages is defined in http://www.jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/maintenance/jsr053/errata_1_2_a_2 0020321.html Comments and suggestions for the JSP spec should be directed to the spec team ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) rather than this mailing list. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31201] - Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201 Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||WONTFIX --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-02 14:47 --- The patch suggested above would be a Tomcat specific solution to a wider i18n problem. Whilst it would work for Tomcat I would not wish to encourage an approach such as this as if you ever need to move to an alternative container, it will break again. Therefore, this patch will not be applied. (Hence the WONTFIX). There are, however, a number of alternative approaches that are spec compliant and are hence container neutral. The simplest approach is to convert the HTML to JSPs and specify the correct page encoding in the new JSPs using %@ page pageEncoding=... %. There are other approaches and if the one suggested above isn't appropriate I suggest that you post a question on the tomcat-user mailing list rather than this bug report. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31201] - Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201 Encoding bug when using jsp:include ... action --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-26 01:56 --- This is a problem at JSP spec(5.4 sec) not Tomcat. JSP spec doesn't show included pages encoding. As far as I read cuurent JSP spec, I think default encoding should be defined by pageEncoding attribute in JSP's page directive of included page. I proposes adding pageEncoding attribute for jsp:include directive (JSP spec 5.4) to specify included page default encoding. If included page has pageEncoding, this jsp:include's encoding should be ignored. However this patch seems valuable since JSP spec will be fixed. I think this patch should be applied for current tomcat. reagrds, Takashi Okamoto - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
