> Yeah, there aren't any. That's the point of URL encoding; NULL bytes > are as acceptable as any other, and your client should be able to > handle them -- so I think that webfs check is just bogus. It should > just encode it as a \0 and pass it through.
(you do mean %00 should result in a byte with value 0, not two bytes (in c notation) '\\' and '0', right?) assuming that every application that uses webfs is prepared to handle a null byte in the middle of a string. what webfs does — complaining loudly — is much preferrable to programs misbehaving silently. since it's quite likely that plan 9 applications are not going to properly deal with a null in a string, it's probablly a good implementation strategy unless you're willing to test all the programs that use webfs to make sure that this case is properly handled. - erik
