At 09:23 AM 9/22/2009 +0100, Alan Kennedy wrote:
[P.J. Eby]
>> Actually, latin-1 bytes encoding is the *simplest* thing that could
>> possibly work, since it works already in e.g. Jython, and is actually
>> in the spec already... and any framework that wants unicode URIs
>> already has to decode them, so the code is already written.
[Armin]
> Except that nobody implements that
So, if nobody implements that, then why are we trying to standardise it?
Is there a real need out there?
Or are all these discussions solely driven by the need/desire to have
only unicode strings in the WSGI dictionary under python 3?
Which is a worthy goal, IMHO. Java has been there since the very
start, since java strings have always been unicode. Take a look at the
java docs for HttpServlet: no methods return bytes/bytearrays.
http://java.sun.com/products/servlet/2.5/docs/servlet-2_5-mr2/javax/servlet/http/HttpServletRequest.html
But the java servlet spec still ignores *all* of the encoding concerns
being discussed here. Which means that mistakes/mojibake must happen
all the time. And it's up to the author of the individual java web
application to solve those problems, using a mechanism appropriate for
their needs and local environment.
Right, and we're not going to be able to solve all the problems
either. What we want -- or at least what *I* want, is to ensure that
the design doesn't generate NEW opportunities for f***ing it up.
_______________________________________________
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
