On 2011-10-07 10:54, Stephen Farrell wrote:

Hi Phill,

Oauth [1] uses ""application/x-www-form-urlencoded" format as defined by
[W3C.REC-html401-19991224]" all over the place to solve basically
this problem but in the context of HTTP URLs which has to be worse
than for a new URI scheme.

Why not do the same here?
...

...because the definition is vague with respect to non-ASCII (that *is* a problem for OAuth, but might be ok here), and because it also leaks the special-casing of SP (encoded as "+") into new areas.

If you like the encoding otherwise, then just refer to RFC 3986 for percent-encoding: <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc3986.html#rfc.section.2.1>.

Best regards, Julian
_______________________________________________
websec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/websec

Reply via email to