Jerry Seutter added the comment: Heh, I think I should not have gotten involved in this bug. :) I have a few comments:
In response to 2.: David M. Kristol in that article is referring to the original Netscape cookie implementation which is somewhat different from what is set out in the RFC's. Now I understand where the difference is. In response to 6: Yes, I was referring to the NAME part of NAME=VALUE... So it looks to me like the Python code implements the specification as set out in the RFC. I agree with you that there are multiple implementations (Java and Perl) in wide use that allow behavior not set out in the RFC. The question is, do we want to stick the bahavior in the RFC, or accomodate existing implementations? My opinion: I agree with you. Can some Python regulars comment on Python's policy in situations like this? I can throw together a patch if this change would likely be accepted. __________________________________ Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://bugs.python.org/issue2193> __________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
