Re: [Web-SIG] FW: Closing #63: RFC2047 encoded words

2009-04-08 Thread Robert Brewer
Brian Smith wrote: Here is the change that removes the use of RFC 2047 from HTTP in HTTPbis. Yes, but parsers need to continue decoding them for many years to come. IMO WSGI origin servers should do this so we can write the decoding logic once and forget about it (assuming middleware and apps

Re: [Web-SIG] FW: Closing #63: RFC2047 encoded words

2009-04-08 Thread Brian Smith
Robert Brewer wrote: Brian Smith wrote: Here is the change that removes the use of RFC 2047 from HTTP in HTTPbis. Yes, but parsers need to continue decoding them for many years to come. IMO WSGI origin servers should do this so we can write the decoding logic once and forget about it

Re: [Web-SIG] FW: Closing #63: RFC2047 encoded words

2009-04-08 Thread Ian Bicking
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 1:14 PM, James Y Knight f...@fuhm.net wrote: If you want to start a discussion about having a standard parsed-header object in WSGI, that's another thing, Off topic to this discussion, but that's what WebOb is. It also largely handles the encoding issues, abstracts

Re: [Web-SIG] FW: Closing #63: RFC2047 encoded words

2009-04-08 Thread Alan Kennedy
[James] If you want to start a discussion about having a standard parsed-header object in WSGI, that's another thing, but saying that WSGI servers should *partially* decode the headers seems rather silly to me. Hi James, It's a shame that your proposal to add the twisted header parsing

Re: [Web-SIG] FW: Closing #63: RFC2047 encoded words

2009-04-08 Thread Brian Smith
Alan Kennedy wrote: [Brian] Here is the change that removes the use of RFC 2047 from HTTP in HTTPbis. Grand so; all we need to do is to wait for everyone to stop using HTTP/1.1, start using HTTP/bis, and our problems are at an end! HTTPbis *is* (will be) HTTP/1.1. It doesn't define a new