Re: paramname in draft-reschke-basicauth-enc-04

Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> Wed, 01 February 2012 02:47 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@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 B161111E8097 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 18:47:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.77
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.77 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.829, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WzTncRHn5uXZ for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 18:47:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4487E11E809D for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Jan 2012 18:47:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1RsQDL-0006cX-EH for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 01 Feb 2012 02:46:27 +0000
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <derhoermi@gmx.net>) id 1RsQD9-0006be-Q1 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 01 Feb 2012 02:46:15 +0000
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([213.165.64.22]) by maggie.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <derhoermi@gmx.net>) id 1RsQD6-000617-T7 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 01 Feb 2012 02:46:15 +0000
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 01 Feb 2012 02:45:46 -0000
Received: from dslb-094-223-147-165.pools.arcor-ip.net (EHLO HIVE) [94.223.147.165] by mail.gmx.net (mp034) with SMTP; 01 Feb 2012 03:45:46 +0100
X-Authenticated: #723575
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+aoIwOgZKaMJh+GmHs/pK3XguARa+L3LQQ+9pHwq sJhcj10shARoje
From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: "\"Martin J. Dürst\"" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2012 03:45:44 +0100
Message-ID: <uj9hi711sohpdljo8tjl8ace5a0uf55eil@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
References: <20120129152840.10536.93223.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4F2567DA.3060608@gmx.de> <visci75v85ndepsfib5qfpdqvsb84m8piu@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> <4F26D337.1020507@gmx.de> <4F279977.1080705@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <4F285AB3.4090506@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <4F285AB3.4090506@gmx.de>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=213.165.64.22; envelope-from=derhoermi@gmx.net; helo=mailout-de.gmx.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1RsQD6-000617-T7 eed36eab3196ae954a33f23bf7052c94
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: paramname in draft-reschke-basicauth-enc-04
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/uj9hi711sohpdljo8tjl8ace5a0uf55eil@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/12293
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: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Resent-Message-Id: <E1RsQDL-0006cX-EH@frink.w3.org>
Resent-Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2012 02:46:27 +0000

* Julian Reschke wrote:
>So it needs a value. We could say
>
>   useUTF8="yes"
>
>but then there's always the problem of remembering whether the syntax is 
>"0"/"1", "false"/"true" or "no"/"yes".

Well you need to know what the value should be in any case and since we
only have one valid value this particular problem does not really arise;
one could similarily argue that encoding=utf-8 is confusing because it
suggests other encodings can be used, or that it applies to the WWW-Au-
thenticate header (like the realm parameter if using non-ascii wasn't
deprecated, if I recall correctly). We could meet in the middle and use
something like `use=utf-8` or `options="utf-8"`. But whatever, not a big
issue.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/