This RFC says the opposite: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1738.txt
Although, truth to be told, later RFCs are a bit obscure about when to use which encoding. Is there any RFC that specifically supersedes this one? Under my point of view, a link is not a form, and so, "x-www-form-urlencoded" is not the proper way to encode a URL *in a link*. What do you think? -----Mensaje original----- De: Oscar Westra van Holthe - Kind [mailto:[email protected]] Enviado el: jueves, 02 de abril de 2009 7:29 Para: Stripes Users List Asunto: Re: [Stripes-users] Plus in Links Altough you may not like it, the plus sign instead of %20 in a URL is the correct way to encode it. I suggest you change your application logic to use the URLDecoder others have mentioned, which will decode it correctly. Oscar -- ,-_ Oscar Westra van holthe - Kind http://www.xs4all.nl/~kindop/ /() ) (__ ( Progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things. =/ () -- Robert Heinlein ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- _______________________________________________ Stripes-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/stripes-users ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Stripes-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/stripes-users
