[Web-SIG] Move to bless Graham's WSGI 1.1 as official spec
pje at telecommunity.com
Fri Nov 27 16:20:48 CET 2009
At 08:42 PM 11/26/2009 -0500, James Y Knight wrote:
>I move to bless mod_wsgi's definition of WSGI 1.1  as the
>official definition of WSGI 1.1, which describes how to implement
>WSGI adapters for both Python 2.x and 3.x. It may not be perfect,
>but, it's been implemented twice, and seems ot have no fatal flaws
>(it doesn't do any lossy transforms, so any issues are irritations
>at worst). The basis for this definition is also described in the
>"WSGI 1.0 Ammendments"  page.
>The definitions as they stand are clear enough to understand and
>implement, but not currently in spec-worthy language. (e.g. it says
>"should" and "may" in a colloquial fashion, but actually means MUST
>in some places and SHOULD in others, as defined by RFC 2119)
>Thus, I'd like to suggest that Graham (if he's willing?) should
>reformat the "Definition"/"Ammendments" as an actual diff against
>the current PEP 333. Then, I will recommend adopting that document
>as an actual standard WSGI 1.1, to replace PEP 333.
I'm +1, with a few caveats. First, as you mention, it needs to be
spec'd properly. In particular, it should be clarified that the main
changes are to *allow byte strings* in certain places where WSGI 1.0
demands a unicode string w/latin-1 encoding.
Second, I do not think that the "additional guarantees/requirements"
can be safely added to a 1.x version, as they make it impossible for
an app to tell whether it's *really* running under 1.1 or under a
broken piece of middleware that's passing through wsgi.version but
not actually providing 1.1-level guarantees. I would therefore
suggest that these additional guarantees and requirements be deferred
to WSGI 2.0.
More information about the Web-SIG