Re: WSGI 2.0 Round 2: requirements and call for interest

On Wed, 6 Jan 2016, Graham Dumpleton wrote:

>
>> On 6 Jan 2016, at 12:09 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> As someone who writes their WSGI applications as functions that take
>> `start_response` and `environ` and doesn't bother with much
>> framework the things I would like to see in a minor revision to WSGI
>> are:
>>
>> * A consistent way to access the raw un-decoded request URI. This is
>>  so I can reconstruct a realistic `PATH_INFO` that has not been
>>  subjected to destructive handling by the server (e.g. apache
>>  messing with `%2F`) before continuing on to a route dispatcher.
>
> This is already available in some servers by way of the REQUEST_URI value.

Yes, and in others (as mentioned by Benoit) as RAW_URI. One
("consistent") way would be better.

[Lots of good information about the challenges associated with using
that information to do anything useful, deleted.]

What I've done in one app is this:
https://github.com/tiddlyweb/tiddlyweb/blob/cc6b67d2855ea4d8d908f1a3e58db0dce7e8d138/tiddlyweb/web/serve.py#L119

Despite the fact that that is not strictly correct, it does mostly work
for the situation described in the comment and the context of that
app. One of the things I want from a light rev of WSGI is not to have
to jump through those hoops.

It may be that's not feasible but I reckon we're at the wishing
stage of the discussion.

-- 
Chris Dent                                   http://burningchrome.com/
                                 [...]
_______________________________________________
Web-SIG mailing list
[email protected]
Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig
Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/gcpw-web-sig%40m.gmane.org