Author |
Message |
Acaria Board Member
Joined: 20 Feb 2009
Posts: 238
|
Posted: Sun May 03, 2009 4:31 pm Post subject: Re: Proper urlencoding of "round brackets" in BBCo |
|
|
It basically just means it's not going to do anything to stop it. XD |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Wicher Board Member
Joined: 08 Mar 2009
Posts: 2
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Holger Board Member
Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 509 Location: Hanover
|
Posted: Fri May 22, 2009 8:29 am Post subject: Re: Proper urlencoding of "round brackets" in BBCo |
|
|
Hi Wicher! Nice to have you here!
Could you please state the difference and why it is better?! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Wicher Board Member
Joined: 08 Mar 2009
Posts: 2
|
Posted: Fri May 22, 2009 8:47 am Post subject: Re: Proper urlencoding of "round brackets" in BBCo |
|
|
With my solution the bbcode.php is not altered to include the parenthesis as "reserved set" characters but are converted to numerical characters in posting.php and viewtopic.php |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Holger Board Member
Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 509 Location: Hanover
|
Posted: Fri May 22, 2009 8:50 am Post subject: Re: Proper urlencoding of "round brackets" in BBCo |
|
|
Ok! I will give it a try! Thank you! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Muzer Board Member
Joined: 12 Mar 2013
Posts: 1
|
Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2013 4:52 pm Post subject: Re: Proper urlencoding of "round brackets" in BBCo |
|
|
Dog Cow wrote: | drathbun wrote: |
I don't know what other implications come out of this. |
You're supporting Wikipedia's arrogance that they can get away with whatever they want. Parantheses should NOT be in URLs, since they are illegal characters. Of course, that assumes that you want to play nice and follow the standards. |
Sincere apologies for resurrecting such a long-dead thread, but I couldn't stand to see so much wrongness on the internet. This level of wrongness cannot be tolerated. So I just had to create an account.
Image link
In the document you linked (an archived version of which can be found here, you can clearly see that brackets ("()") are *NOT* illegal characters in URLs. Instead, they are reserved characters - "The purpose of reserved characters is to provide a set of delimiting characters that are distinguishable from other data within a URI. URIs that differ in the replacement of a reserved character with its corresponding percent-encoded octet are not equivalent. Percent-encoding a reserved character, or decoding a percent-encoded octet that corresponds to a reserved character, will change how the URI is interpreted by most applications. Thus, characters in the reserved set are protected from normalization and are therefore safe to be used by scheme-specific and producer-specific algorithms for delimiting data subcomponents within a URI." This means that these characters are guaranteed not to be encoded in URLs, but can be relied upon as remaining unencoded. This means that a web server can easily interpret them specially if it wants to, but of course has the option of not doing so.
"Aside from dot-segments in hierarchical paths, a path segment is considered opaque by the generic syntax. URI producing applications often use the reserved characters allowed in a segment to delimit scheme-specific or dereference-handler-specific subcomponents. For example, the semicolon (";") and equals ("=") reserved characters are often used to delimit parameters and parameter values applicable to that segment. The comma (",") reserved character is often used for similar purposes. For example, one URI producer might use a segment such as "name;v=1.1" to indicate a reference to version 1.1 of "name", whereas another might use a segment such as "name,1.1" to indicate the same. Parameter types may be defined by scheme-specific semantics, but in most cases the syntax of a parameter is specific to the implementation of the URI's dereferencing algorithm."
Next time, instead of accusing innocent sites of violating standards, try *READING THE STANDARDS YOU'RE LINKING TO*
TL;DR: Wikipedia is not violating any standard or wrong. phpBB2 is broken by not allowing () in URLs.. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lumpy burgertushie Board Member
Joined: 18 Nov 2008
Posts: 266
|
Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2013 11:39 pm Post subject: Re: Proper urlencoding of "round brackets" in BBCo |
|
|
if phpbb2 is broken because it does not allow these type of characters then so are many , if not most, other web based scripts on the net.
it is the odd program that will allow those characters in a url to work.
just what you said is true. they are used for very specific reasons on specific servers to be able to read them. your normal, standard server setup does not allow them.
just because something is OK in one place does not make it a net wide standard, or at least it shouldn't be considered that anyway.
robert |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|