Re: [http-state] non-ASCII cookie values (was Re: Closing Ticket 3: Public Suffixes)

[Julian Reschke <[e-mail]>]

Adam Barth wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 12:11 AM, Julian Reschke <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> Adam Barth wrote:
>>> ...
>>> Those cases being charset0001, charset0002, and charset0003.  One
>>> possible explanation is that Safari rejects cookies that have
>>> non-ASCII characters in their values.
>>> ...
>> ...which I think is not really a bug, according to the specs.
> 
> I'm not sure that's the most important consideration.
> 
>> Unless that affects Safari's interoperability, I'd strongly recommend to
>> consider making this the recommended behavior.
> 
> Why?  Ideally, a justification would be an evidence-based argument we
> could use to convince the implementors of IE, Firefox, Chrome, and
> Opera that the benefits of changing their behavior out-weighs the
> costs.
> 
> In general, I'm very reluctant to specify a behavior that conflicts
> with IE, Firefox, Chrome, and Opera.  In specific, IE has something
> like 99% market share in some Asian markets.  The fact that this issue
> affects Asian markets disproportionately means the pressure to be
> IE-like is even greater than usual.
> ...

On the other hand, why require something that's known not be in use (if 
that is the case)?

If you allow non-ASCII characters (or actually require support), you'll 
also have to figure out how existing server and client based APIs are to 
deal with them (so what encoding is it?).

Best regards, Julian