Message257787
| Author |
martin.panter |
| Recipients |
Emil Stenström, ezio.melotti, gvanrossum, martin.panter, vstinner |
| Date |
2016年01月09日.00:02:26 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1452297747.11.0.0403234805295.issue26045@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
Personally I am skeptical if suggesting UTF-8 for the body data is a good idea, but I can go along with it, since other people want it. But I do strongly question whether it is right to suggest UTF-8 for header fields. The RFC <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7230#page-26> only mentions ASCII and Latin-1.
Newer protocols based on HTTP (RTSP comes to mind) do specify UTF-8 for the header, but that is probably out of scope of both the HTTP module and beginner-targetted errors.
If I were redoing this patch, I would drop all the changes except at the body.encode() line in Emil’s original post. |
|