-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday, November 28, 2002, Nathan J. Yoder wrote...
JA>> I think that is correct behavior per RFCs. Special characters JA>> such as spaces, &, and such are supposed to converted to the hex JA>> version. > ... JA>> So TB! is only behaving as per the rules. You'll find it is the JA>> other mail clients that are misbehaving. And the author of the JA>> link also made the mistake too. > Yes, but it's beside the point. There's that internet saying, > (paraphrasing) "be lenient in what you receive and strict in what > you send." Other clients ( or at least Outlook Express) do interpret > the mailto: correctly even when it's not properly formed with the > hex codes. Most websites I've seen that use the subject line in > mailto: don't use the hex codes or a suitable substitute at all, so > it would make sense to have The Bat! understand improperly formatted > mailto:s. It's almost this kind of thinking (no offence) that starts getting programs in trouble. I know mailto: URLs won't cause any halm (unless you do permit certain headers to be set), but saying "well, just let this one slip a little" just starts to promote bad coding, and hence security bugs. Plus the mailto: is follow standard RFC guidelines on correctly formatted URLs (you won't find a single website that can be served with a space in it, the server will convert the names to %20). Break it, and you might end up causing all kinds of issues. Saying that other clients (OE in your reference) interpret the mailto: correctly is incorrect. RFCs say, you *must* convert the special characters to their hex equivalent. Reading it in any other ways is wrong, no matter how you look at it. The guidelines are setup to make things consistent, and to make working with things viable. God knows where we'd be if somebody hadn't decided to try standardise the networking model (OSI Model and variants). I think RitLabs have done the correct thing in following the RFCs correctly. The more compliance you have with standards, the more likely you are to do well. Start changing things, or flexing the rules slightly, and you end up having all kinds of problems. - -- Jonathan Angliss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Fingerprint: 676A 1701 665B E343 E393 B8D2 2B83 E814 F8FD 1F73 iQA/AwUBPeb4lyuD6BT4/R9zEQLYgQCeIMvs7Wkz7fDTHxh6TsqePTLoJ+YAoOrm x/wVHSg1EDWk25vEJKssR4f+ =dL2T -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ________________________________________________ Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
