couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Davis <paul.joseph.da...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: CRLF or LF in our JSON?
Date Thu, 24 Sep 2009 02:47:24 GMT
Good find. \r\n FTW!

On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Adam Kocoloski <kocolosk@apache.org> wrote:
> Good idea.  HTTP says CRLF everywhere except the entity-body, where it has
> no comment.  application/json couldn't care less what we do, but since we're
> serving text/plain:
>
>> The canonical form of any MIME "text" subtype MUST always represent a
>> line break as a CRLF sequence.  Similarly, any occurrence of CRLF in
>> MIME "text" MUST represent a line break.  Use of CR and LF outside of
>> line break sequences is also forbidden.
>
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2046#section-4.1.1
>
> That seems like a vote for CRLF across the board to me.  Best, Adam
>
> On Sep 23, 2009, at 10:13 PM, Paul Davis wrote:
>
>> Is there a preference for text/plain or HTTP or somewhere we can
>> default the decision to? It seems fairly arbitrary.
>>
>> I do remember someone saying just the other day that not having \r\n
>> for changes meant that Twisted didn't work out of the box. I think it
>> was Mark or Benoît.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 10:02 PM, Adam Kocoloski <kocolosk@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi, I noticed we're fairly inconsistent in the line terminators that we
>>> use:
>>> views use \r\n, _changes uses \n, etc.  I guess we should standardize on
>>> one
>>> or the other.  Anybody have a preference?  Best,
>>>
>>> Adam
>>>
>
>

Mime
View raw message