Closed jogu closed 2 months ago
Wouldn't it make sense to introduce the general encoding scheme somewhere in terminology with most of the original text you linked and then reference to it?
MUST be encoded using the UTF-8 character encoding scheme [RFC3629] first; the resulting octet sequence then needs to be further encoded using the escaping rules defined in [W3C.REC-html401-19991224].
Thanks Christian. I'm not sure if I want to start picking at some of that as things start to unravel/get more complicated. The RFC6749 definition isn't actually the canonical one anymore - the definition of application/x-www-form-urlencoded
as per the official media type registration ( https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/x-www-form-urlencoded ) is actually found in https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#application/x-www-form-urlencoded but that's a pretty hard definition to read... and the important thing is basically "you can just use what the url/http library in your favourite language already does but do make sure to use utf-8 as that's the only part that's really not defined elsewhere".
In general I would just remove the word first
from the sentences because in the referred section there is a continuation (first encode it using utf-8, then escape it) and here we are missing that so it reads a bit funny (at least to me, but I am not a native speaker).
I tend to agree with @nemqe 's suggetion to remove first
. and the direction to clarify things as they are in this PR vs introducing a new section
Thanks for the feedback, and to Kristina for adding the suggestions - I've committed them, please review/approve!
Mirrors text used in https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#appendix-B
closes #40