Am Mittwoch, den 05.12.2007, 11:22 +0100 schrieb Thomas Lotze: > Christian Theune wrote: > > > That depends on the container format and therefore it's the responsibility > > of the container (e.g. a HTTP header) to remove the whitespace. > > > > Note that AFAICT RFC 2045 section 5.1 (that's what you're referring to > > AFAICT) defines the MIME type specification as done with the Content-Type > > header for MIME messages without defining exactly how the actual type > > relates to the container. > > That's why I asked about the intended semantics of our MIME type strings: > should anything that's called a MIME or content type be strict according > to the spec, it being the responsibility of whatever creates those strings > to make them so, or should we have to be forgiving in all the places that > consume MIME types? > > > IMHO we should not pay attention to whitespace. > > I'm not sure whether you mean we should ignore whitespace in a MIME type > string or not have to pay attention to the issue when consuming one.
IMHO we should assume whatever is given to us was unpacked by the container format and is intended to be a valid MIME type. Meaning we should not strip it. Christian -- gocept gmbh & co. kg - forsterstrasse 29 - 06112 halle (saale) - germany www.gocept.com - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - phone +49 345 122 9889 7 - fax +49 345 122 9889 1 - zope and plone consulting and development
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
_______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )