[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnash-dev] non-conformance to HTTP standards

From: Eric Hughes
Subject: Re: [Gnash-dev] non-conformance to HTTP standards
Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 09:54:19 -0600

At 09:38 AM 5/17/2007, Martin Guy wrote:
Usually "lax with what you accept, strict with what you emit" is the
byword so right on.

Thanks. I wasn't worried I was doing a bad thing, just one worthy of making note of. There are times when masking bad behavior in other software is A Bad Thing. I don't think that's the case here.

However I'm surprised if there's a hole in the
HTML standard.

Don't be. The formal grammars in RFC's are not of particularly high quality, in my experience, full of surprises, generally-small holes, ambiguities, and the like. Putting a compiler to work would greatly help the situation.

So here's another one. The new URI specification, RFC 3986, does _not_ accept lowercase hexdigits in percent-quoted characters. "%7F" is legal but "%7f" is not. This was not the case in the previous revision. I am guessing this would be a surprise to most people, including some of the authors. (FWIW, I'm accepting lowercase.)

And while I'm on the subject, the SMTP standard, even after its restatement RFC 2821, is not up to snuff. For example, it doesn't even fully define the accepted-vs.-nonaccepted line ending grammar! Sure, if everything is CR-LF, you're safe, but the handling of naked CR and naked LF is incompletely specified. At least HTTP doesn't have _that_ problem.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]