On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 3:07 PM, P.J. Eby <p...@telecommunity.com> wrote: > At 11:30 AM 9/22/2009 +0100, Alan Kennedy wrote: >> >> I see this as being the same as Graham's suggested approach of a >> per-server configurable charset, which is then stored in the WSGI >> dictionary, so that applications that have problems, i.e. that detect >> mojibake in the unicode SCRIPT_NAME or PATH_INFO, can attempt to undo >> the faulty decoding by the server. > > This puts the burden on the wrong end of the pipe: there are more apps than > servers and they would *all* have to check this in order to be sane. >
Except most everyone is using unicode in their apps already through frameworks. If the web clients are moving towards unicode, the HTTP RFCs(and most other internet protocols), python, and python frameworks, and other languages frameworks all moving towards unicode why should wsgi not? _______________________________________________ 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
