Skip to content

field-value value space #215

Closed
Closed

Description

@annevk

I mostly know about browsers and didn't test other clients. When sending browsers effectively allow all byte values, except 0x00, 0x0A, and 0x0D.

When receiving 0x00 is also allowed, though Chrome started outlawing that recently and it seems like it might stick.

As far as I can tell field-value is quite a bit more restrictive. I wonder whether that should be reconsidered.

(I originally brought this up in #19.)

(I also haven't tested obs-fold that I remember. I don't think there's a way to force browsers to send headers like that, but receiving is a thing that probably ought to work and likely does.)

Activity

  1. reschke commented on Mar 28, 2019

    @reschke
    Contributor

    Expanding the set of allowed characters is a non-compatible change that might break existing components.

  2. self-assigned this
    on Mar 28, 2019
  3. mnot commented on Jul 11, 2019

    @mnot
    Member

    Yeah, I think this is out of scope for what we're trying to do here; we can't retroactively expand this and hope it'll work in all cases.

    Flagging for discussion in Montreal.

  4. annevk commented on Jul 11, 2019

    @annevk
    ContributorAuthor

    I think you'll at least have to warn servers that clients are not as restrictive as they might otherwise assume? I guess arguably that's part of generally having a robust setup, but that it's standardized to be the case for browsers might warrant an additional notice?

  5. reschke commented on Jul 25, 2019

    @reschke
    Contributor

    Hmm. Wouldn't be the warning that some clients actually might be as restrictive as specified, so just targeting common browsers might lead to breakage with other clients?

  6. mnot commented on Jul 25, 2019

    @mnot
    Member

    Discussed in montreal; close with no action.

  7. annevk commented on Aug 8, 2019

    @annevk
    ContributorAuthor

    @reschke for responses yes, for requests, no.

  8. zcorpan commented on Dec 18, 2019

    @zcorpan

    If I understand correctly, this was closed because you don't want to start allowing characters that were previously not allowed. But this issue is also asking for the reverse, for 0x00. Was that discussed?

  9. reschke commented on Dec 18, 2019

    @reschke
    Contributor

    ?

    0x00 was not allowed at any point.

  10. zcorpan commented on Dec 18, 2019

    @zcorpan

    Oh, OK. Sorry. I misunderstood @annevk's original comment.

  11. deleted a comment from Suhatec on Mar 26, 2024
  12. deleted a comment from Suhatec on Mar 26, 2024
  13. deleted a comment from YouTuberf on Nov 15, 2024
  14. deleted a comment from QueTee82 on Aug 9, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions