Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signatures vs sf-date
Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Sat, 03 December 2022 04:50 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54A70C14F692 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Dec 2022 20:50:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.049
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.049 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnot.net header.b=OEwLjEus; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=pKQhP4Ap
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wUb4stMIU8B3 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Dec 2022 20:50:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lyra.w3.org (lyra.w3.org [128.30.52.18]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87DF9C14E514 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Dec 2022 20:50:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1p1KSH-00BD1A-SX for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 03 Dec 2022 04:48:49 +0000
Resent-Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2022 04:48:49 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1p1KSH-00BD1A-SX@lyra.w3.org>
Received: from mimas.w3.org ([128.30.52.79]) by lyra.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1p1KSF-00BD0D-Sx for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 03 Dec 2022 04:48:47 +0000
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1p1KSE-006BvF-5r for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sat, 03 Dec 2022 04:48:47 +0000
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1EC35C00C5; Fri, 2 Dec 2022 23:48:35 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 02 Dec 2022 23:48:35 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h=cc :cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1670042915; x= 1670129315; bh=vrzSU+oFluB6306QBR8nZ6Uziy2MiyAsTgL8V6bXWA4=; b=O EwLjEuskcAeTJZLzVatwZS1UbVM3M5aMAoScigShQC0nHnyBLo27FFEq8Fl0/xJA feOgicFBxwLPgPuqVYRmzKJS/k4pWQaMrO3qCTsGkn2n6z9AxF8nSU5s41jvu/oR BW1pfCqNpbL+1JAFqZBXvMpnzWZDn7eUs1XEtb9roXQLJwQpUIv1JiZk7ZwZxPpj kip4e/YP2K4lbAaOaHNV3TfwSZVPWllciSjjn8M8GbBVE8o7EJQsnXddUP+4fWZ+ gmfn0DKaw6b0SRBMZ0+izy3lRQHgD+jOcIMkjOueYPc6Tmu5Ie0IdJIjwp5xsYLT ZPD01toSZP+o3pDrhbZUw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1670042915; x= 1670129315; bh=vrzSU+oFluB6306QBR8nZ6Uziy2MiyAsTgL8V6bXWA4=; b=p KQhP4AptpeeYpZ9A7BrYsi2ucPeoC2eMEOqWeCpHHcQ6ol20rLwAUnrBAhkBRNDe XWqyk3mowveSKuSnEDWno7tzZ2MRNJQzYoDqTYKHFhxzfYPBnEZqVzmQ9rYgORyi Baa+sFiy3lRMmAGVoGNZgwhZKAekHPxJlD6Z4BiJU+qrzhphWBOnzMiMinsHE6xB j+sa+wuq9UhivBsbv7Joe6I83D/qWzjdTMJr+TCtHD81MMC/z63cXZzIYlM8QInH YTX336t5Iv0YAXJJVFSwOiK+TjtBXJREpuLDaOT14mIwwJJW5uLoXwduaypYe8QD l2wiUe2NK3aeEqtbzWMgw==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:I9WKYzPUwvnL_-CfhTEZMbu3cOrVn78TaKjL_oxKW5o4YXAJ352a8Q> <xme:I9WKY99HlINFNuk8IfOEt9-wogdQkhsoRTeewNWRpaF6-xOtX4H1jzB2VJr9XYQRa C7wGQ2h3Ev7yL105A>
X-ME-Received: <xmr:I9WKYyRMqdnTEQCHOQIUpieTZQVJeFqDloRcDNux0_eJQyR1fzRPvKmXOtGWnqQ28AATX72v0NfVo198bYlehzSWjPQll1r2SQ6IYv4i0PQpgtAH5cxfL8es>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvhedrtdelgdejhecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpegtggfuhfgjffevgffkfhfvofesthhqmhdthhdtvdenucfhrhhomhepofgrrhhk ucfpohhtthhinhhghhgrmhcuoehmnhhothesmhhnohhtrdhnvghtqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpedttdeggfeuvedtudfgtdekffdugeevteffgeejlefhvdetvdeujeetgeeugeet teenucffohhmrghinhepmhhnohhtrdhnvghtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenuc frrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvth
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:I9WKY3svkXUAB_oK9h3pLj-ZayKie-Cak__DQ_Ir5TLEw7rEVCtbhg> <xmx:I9WKY7d9ISsdEl3NJYoRAkUPwh6rn4Z7TLbsfd1aREXE5XZsis4l6A> <xmx:I9WKYz2Nz4sVbuT48Ife9OyGe5QYo4EW5923kgVIbAlZ1Qc-ZPapNQ> <xmx:I9WKY8rqo-1yRGfOqHcBFxbaRf_0qIaI8L38gSdqCaayr9lOvBZh4g>
Feedback-ID: ie6694242:Fastmail
Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 2 Dec 2022 23:48:33 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.200.110.1.12\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <202212022147.2B2LlcqP008154@critter.freebsd.dk>
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2022 15:48:09 +1100
Cc: Roy Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <53D8E497-284A-4B2C-91D8-367542AA0A7C@mnot.net>
References: <2070c8e0-98d6-7b63-77c3-550bcd661397@gmx.de> <202212011735.2B1HZYgm004808@critter.freebsd.dk> <e580db7e-c0ec-0f1a-17af-5719ab09468c@gmx.de> <202212020810.2B28ALnL004331@critter.freebsd.dk> <eee5a787-da37-feb1-098a-7d2d9c0f1d37@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <202212020848.2B28mGbc004600@critter.freebsd.dk> <4e251954-afb6-fa08-616c-db95e23ad1fd@gmx.de> <202212020946.2B29kSe6004829@critter.freebsd.dk> <75dad0c0-e3bb-1189-0c16-e8275d3879ff@gmx.de> <202212021016.2B2AGvEP004972@critter.freebsd.dk> <9990b393-93ff-75af-4e14-de4f6ba3366c@gmx.de> <7b7f714d-890e-db90-4922-cfbc46b3e999@gmx.de> <202212021129.2B2BTY9f005362@critter.freebsd.dk> <b1d3af79-373f-a9af-7ff9-39f5f44915f0@gmx.de> <202212021214.2B2CEUQx005654@critter.freebsd.dk> <7a93fa17-38fe-5fa8-54ed-a726ab9d5a39@gmx.de> <841DC85E-F936-4350-A74F-170D22E6ADCE@gbiv.com> <202212021918.2B2JIBHC007228@critter.freebsd.dk> <65070e79-5429-a4cd-abe2-667b526badf1@gmx.de> <202212022147.2B2LlcqP008154@critter.freebsd.dk>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3731.200.110.1.12)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=66.111.4.25; envelope-from=mnot@mnot.net; helo=out1-smtp.messagingengine.com
X-W3C-Hub-DKIM-Status: validation passed: (address=mnot@mnot.net domain=mnot.net), signature is good
X-W3C-Hub-DKIM-Status: validation passed: (address=mnot@mnot.net domain=messagingengine.com), signature is good
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.8
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1p1KSE-006BvF-5r 7b23aa5786bd56fa1244448302753929
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signatures vs sf-date
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/53D8E497-284A-4B2C-91D8-367542AA0A7C@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/40633
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <https://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
My, you've all been busy while I slept. Catching up on this thread with my (for now, personal) thoughts. 1) We're adding Dates because it's a fairly common data type and generic software can do potentially interesting things when presenting / manipulating them. It's not a _strong_ motivation, but it seems to have got us over the wire. 2) I added %-encoded strings to Problem because the other encoding didn't fit cleanly into SF-land. However, we should _not_ add non-ASCII strings to SF because they're a footgun that for _most_ cases, will cause more trouble than they're worth. In the protocol (not content), most strings are intended for machines, not people, and ASCII strings can be processed fairly unambiguously; that's not true when you open things up to full Unicode. There are some cases where non-ASCII strings are needed in header fields; mostly, when you're presenting something to a human from the fields. Those cases are not as common. However, there's a catch to adding them: if full unicode strings were available in the protocol, many designers will understandably use them because it's been drilled into all our heads that unicode is what you use for strings. Hence, footgun. By leaving full unicode support out of the spec and forcing designers to take positive steps to support it, the (relatively small) barrier to adoption makes them stop and think whether they need it. I think that's a good thing. I also know that will make some i18n folks unhappy, and I'm sorry for that; unfortunately we're working in an area where protocol artefacts intended for humans and machines are mixed, and so it gets difficult. All of that said, once the algorithms are stable (as Julian has pointed out, they contain some errors), I wouldn't object to including the %-encoding text as an appendix in sf-bis with appropriate warnings, if other folks are amenable. 3) Please keep the discussion courteous. Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/
- signatures vs sf-date Julian Reschke
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Julian Reschke
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Martin J. Dürst
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Julian Reschke
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Julian Reschke
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Poul-Henning Kamp
- support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signatures… Julian Reschke
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Julian Reschke
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Julian Reschke
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Julian Reschke
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Julian Reschke
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Julian Reschke
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Carsten Bormann
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Justin Richer
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Julian Reschke
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Ilari Liusvaara
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Roy T. Fielding
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Roy T. Fielding
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Justin Richer
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Julian Reschke
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Julian Reschke
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Mark Nottingham
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Julian Reschke
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Julian Reschke
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Mark Nottingham
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Julian Reschke
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Willy Tarreau
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Julian Reschke
- Re: support for non-ASCII in strings, was: signat… Julian Reschke
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Julian Reschke
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Mark Nottingham
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Julian Reschke
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Lucas Pardue
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Julian Reschke
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Ilari Liusvaara
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Lucas Pardue
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Mark Nottingham
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Lucas Pardue
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Mark Nottingham
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Julian Reschke
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Mark Nottingham
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Julian Reschke
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Watson Ladd
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Julian Reschke
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Watson Ladd
- Re: signatures vs sf-date Julian Reschke