[Web-SIG] Stuff left to be done on WSGI

Phillip J. Eby pje at telecommunity.com
Sat Aug 28 05:22:01 CEST 2004

At 05:11 PM 8/27/04 -0700, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>I'd be inclined to keep a separation between status and headers, so that 
>one doesn't have to worry about collisions, namespace pollution, etc.

It's only a collision if some future version of HTTP decides to use 
'Status:' as a response header, in which case CGI is in trouble.  :)

>For that matter, my preference would be for environ to be split into 
>(environ, request_method, request_url, request_headers) or similar. 
>However, I know it's late, and I don't want to hold things up.

Don't worry about the lateness.  Let's do it right.

That having been said, I've previously mentioned these reasons for *not* 
doing request headers and suchlike:

1. lots of code in-the-field knows how to do sensible things with CGI 
variables, but not HTTP headers

2. HTTP doesn't differentiate between "target of this request" and "where 
the application is", but CGI does (SCRIPT_NAME + PATH_INFO)

More information about the Web-SIG mailing list