IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ietf-types] Status of application/patch or text/patch?

Jon Moore <jonm@jjmoore.net> Fri, 20 July 2012 20:48 UTC

Return-Path: <jonm@jjmoore.net>
X-Original-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A230E21F852E for <ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:48:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.377
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.377 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.600, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 cMCbcbmZEVnj for <ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:48:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gh0-f172.google.com (mail-gh0-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0125D21F846B for <ietf-types@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:48:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ghbg16 with SMTP id g16so4831263ghb.31 for <ietf-types@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:49:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=KbyNIXnqho81GLXuhuvJxlRLmu7iwtNO+HU1YTMf98g=; b=IaxARDIhByT1r+wxERcQkPM0LtkdwbfEpuDcol2Z7AzPdJoUuaPTRlB8I+agFUOdyq GaOp3UCP3vQZY8FrB3+lb9bSL1XWVKQzOKSzjQR0SwvJH0GT6KiG9HzMVofjNU/iSaEC 2hzf4OxsGi0gwB9P4maD+ScZt767OzFrRF4fKfHSv72rMabpu9Vv/CzUXth0lwhWKGAB VPW3G2KBmMURDGHesxOvb9GdirNC+zMwtyEEyxW7oNWaUtAbe/GnF3rv2FgsRzT0YHTr 6SVes8ZmQP1N6M6yX/lpGOf48q4pioroCZK5wacWexDyomhjSJb6Bi+LXigQIi15CRBm uaJA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.182.231 with SMTP id eh7mr9379777igc.42.1342817358996; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:49:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.64.57.4 with HTTP; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:49:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [75.149.106.130]
In-Reply-To: <1F8E110D-6F65-442D-922A-C88090FC33F2@hoplahup.net>
References: <CAMHjJ=Sr+pVyqSCZeJw5ECjWHjSpeu1+womAxeAO6VQCv8aT6g@mail.gmail.com> <87k3y03q69.fsf@latte.josefsson.org> <50086D95.7080004@gmx.de> <87txx2yay1.fsf@latte.josefsson.org> <50093E36.1000107@gmx.de> <vmfi08t6tr0n8aisarmurigm7f8h4j484i@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> <50094599.3090804@gmx.de> <nlii08hr4iatmckce26oh8fq9u9o1fv31k@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> <CANfjZH3_6TjRWtuU5R6pdg3mUZf222R-+L17OVyeLLUnS4mngA@mail.gmail.com> <CAMHjJ=R3v4QGUBAKk035juyrYoBKgN36y5A=LfF0jDimEVHeTg@mail.gmail.com> <1F8E110D-6F65-442D-922A-C88090FC33F2@hoplahup.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 16:49:18 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMHjJ=QNGKyjPToz-Z_HDcymWWvwRWCh0zTbu69tkzrn1V_Bww@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jon Moore <jonm@jjmoore.net>
To: Paul Libbrecht <paul@hoplahup.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlfQEQyNFbQK9g67zNGMKftutHcFYQwu8KVKWnJiWc1UHrjWzv087j/XJuiXTiNs72yY0xZ
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, ietf-types@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-types] Status of application/patch or text/patch?
X-BeenThere: ietf-types@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Media \(MIME\) type review" <ietf-types.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-types>, <mailto:ietf-types-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-types>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-types@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-types-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-types>, <mailto:ietf-types-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 20:48:23 -0000

On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Paul Libbrecht <paul@hoplahup.net> wrote:
> Erm... source charset makes sense to me (this is "the charset of the patch").
> But target charset makes no sense into a media-type... this is "after applying a patch" which is beyond the scope of a single file.

No, the issue is that the patch file could have mixed charsets. If the
change is 'convert README from iso-8859-1 to utf-8', then the patch
file itself will have two character sets:

1. The lines that begin with '-' or ' ' will be iso-8859-1.
2. The lines that begin with '+' will be utf-8.

Since these are incompatible charsets (neither is a superset of the
other), we need two charset parameters to describe them, and this
patch is not capable of being a text/* document. I'm open to other
names besides 'source' and 'target', but I'm not sure how we get
around having two of them for this case.

Jon
-- 
........
Jon Moore

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email