[Web-SIG] Future of WSGI
mborch at gmail.com
Tue Nov 24 22:28:31 CET 2009
On 11/24/09 6:44 PM, Ian Bicking wrote:
> Have you read the threads on WSGI 2? These issues are discussed at
> length, though they haven't been put into a spec.
Okay, sounds good. I have tried to follow up on the discussion, but
there's just too much noise to find out what the consensus is.
> The proposal that seemed to work best was to keep the environ as str
> (i.e., unicode in Python 3), and eliminate the problematic SCRIPT_NAME
> and PATH_INFO, replacing them with url-encoded values. Also I think
> everyone is okay with removing start_response. All text would be
> decoded as latin1 on Python 3 (which allows for transcoding; also most
> text is not unicode). The request and response body would remain bytes.
I assume with "all text" you mean all header text, e.g. all header values.
Can we talk briefly then about wsgi.*? I think we should eliminate them
and in their place put a real request object, something very basic that
has only what's absolutely necessary to communicate the essential data
from the low-level HTTP request.
There is no way that the environment can express an HTTP request. This
was a mistake in my view and we should rectify it either in 1.1 or 2.0.
More information about the Web-SIG