Tres Seaver wrote:
ideally, the
framework will do this in a way which keeps the application writer
blissfully ignorant of the distinction.
As an application developer, I would like to agree with the above. I am
going to rely on a good framework to handle a lot of these issues. It
seems that a lot of the discussion, while over my head, assumes that
application developers are going to be working directly with WSGI.
Technically, that is possible, but I think you should remember that most
application developers are going to rely on a framework to give them a
usable API. My opinion, as an application developer, would be to keep
WSGI as clean as possible and allow the frameworks to handle creating a
good API that gives options for handling byte/character encoding issues.
Its a lot easier to change/update a framework than a spec. Keep WSGI as
simple as possible and let the frameworks manage the more complicated
aspects of character encoding and clean APIs.
Just my $0.02.
--------------------------------------
Randy Syring
RCS Computers & Web Solutions
502-644-4776
http://www.rcs-comp.com
"Whether, then, you eat or drink or
whatever you do, do all to the glory
of God." 1 Cor 10:31
_______________________________________________
Web-SIG mailing list
Web-SIG@python.org
Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/archive%40mail-archive.com
