> On 6 Jan 2016, at 09:19, Aymeric Augustin > <aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote: > > Hello Benoît, > > Thanks for clarifying that you also had the reverse problem in mind, headers > sent by applications. This side is less problematic in the sense that > application authors can adapt to stronger requirements. > > In general this is a bit of a mess due to differences between what the RFC > 2616 says and what browsers do in practice. That’s why I believe the > pragmatic solution is to exchange bytes. (This isn’t a major issue in the > grand scheme of things anyway.) > > Best regards, >
Folks, just a reminder: RFC 2616 is dead. RFC 7230 says that *newly defined* header fields should limit their field values to US-ASCII, but older header fields are a crapshoot (though it notes that “in practice, most” header field values use US-ASCII). Regardless, it seems to me that the correct method of communicating field values would have been byte strings. Cory
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Web-SIG mailing list Web-SIG@python.org Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/archive%40mail-archive.com
