Sorry, I don't quite understand.
On 11/07/2012 06:08 AM, Senthil Kumaran wrote:
Had not known about the 'data' url scheme. Thanks for pointing out ( http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2397 ) and the documentation patch. BTW, documentation patch is easy to get in, but should the support in a more natural form, where data url is parsed internally by the module
Do you mean the parse_data_url function should be removed and put into DataResponse (or DataHandler)?
and expected results be returned should be considered?
What expected results? And in what way should they be considered? Considered for what?
That could be targeted for 3.4 and docs recipe does serve for all the other releases.
Thank you, Senthil
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:45 PM, Mathias Panzenböck firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
Ok, I've written an issue in the python bug tracker and attached a doc patch for the recipe:
On 11/04/2012 09:28 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
On Sunday, 4 November 2012, Mathias Panzenböck wrote:
Shouldn't there be *one* obvious way to do this? req.headers
Well, I'd say that the stdlib docs imply that req.info http://req.info is the required way so
that's the "one obvious way". If you want to add extra methods for convenience, fair enough, but code that doesn't already know it is handling a data URL can't use them so I don't see the point, personally.
But others may have different views...