[Seaside-dev] Re: encoded stream

[Julian Fitzell]

On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 9:22 AM, Philippe Marschall <
philippe.marschall at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2009/2/1 Julian Fitzell <jfitzell at gmail.com>:
> > Do we really just mean "native" encoding here?
>
> Yes we mean native, where native means native to your Smalltalk
> dialect and not native to your operating system. They may or may not
> be the same depending on your Smalltalk dialect and your operating
> system ;-)
>

Yes, understood.

> My point isn't that we need to support conversions to arbitrary
> > encodings. My point is that it is easier to understand what is
> > happening when you know what the two encodings *are*. We don't have to
> > allow (for the moment) anything but UTF-8 for the external encoding
> > when UTF-8 is specified as the internal encoding. I have no problem
> > with that limitation for now.
> >
> > All I'm saying is if you know your options are "utf-8/native",
> > "latin-1/native", or "utf-8/utf-8" then it is perfectly clear what is
> > being sent to the browser *and* what you are supposed to be dealing
> > with in your image.
>
> If the options are like this, then I'm cool with it.


Ok, sounds like a sliver of agreement. :) I'm not sure of the top of my head
what the best way to provide that view is but I'll file an issue for it.


> > I suggest Lukas finish his changes to have the Response encode on the
> > fly using the codec specified in the server adaptor. We can revisit
> > this [further architectural changes] again for the next release.
>
> Sure
>

I think Lukas actually ran into problems with this... Lukas?

Julian
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/seaside-dev/attachments/20090205/f76edd22/attachment.htm