Double encoding of restrict/exclude arguments

Greetings Gilles,

I put your "double encoding" suggestion into FAQ 4.20.  In writing the 
entry, I became convinced that it is the only logical value for the 
CGI argument -- the argument is a URL which contains '%20', not ' ', 
and so to pass the argument we need to encode '%20', not encode ' '.
(I'll try to read your mails twice as carefully in future :)

That means we don't need to find a way to implement the 'feature' I 
was trying to put in, with or without pitfalls.  Do others agree?

Lachlan

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 07:31, Gilles Detillieux wrote:
> Have you tried an extra level of encoding, i.e. encoding %20 as
> %2520?  In that way, the %25 in the CGI input parameter should
> decode as %, so you should be left with %20 in the "restrict" URL
> pattern.
>
> My recommendation is that we back out this feature until someone
> can properly assess all the repercussions of it, and find a way of
> implementing it that avoids all the pitfalls.

-- 
[email protected]
ht://Dig developer DownUnder  (http://www.htdig.org)


-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now.
Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with
a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id56&alloc_id438&op=click
_______________________________________________
ht://Dig Developer mailing list:
[email protected]
List information (subscribe/unsubscribe, etc.)
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/htdig-dev