Yes, it is now the URLEncoder service, so that you can easily override it.
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 3:58 AM, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Em Mon, 27 Oct 2008 07:22:00 -0300, kranga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu:
>
>> As long as your custom scheme can also handle UTF-8 s
Em Mon, 27 Oct 2008 07:22:00 -0300, kranga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu:
As long as your custom scheme can also handle UTF-8 standard scheme so
that libraries that we integrated with (JS libraries and others) that
produce encoded URLs don't break.
In addition, I suggest something obvious: t
try users"
Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2008 6:22 PM
Subject: Re: The URL encoding issue
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 7:01 PM, Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
BTW,
I'm actively working on the issue with URL encoding/decoding. Because
of the differences between Jetty and To
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 7:01 PM, Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> BTW,
>
> I'm actively working on the issue with URL encoding/decoding. Because
> of the differences between Jetty and Tomcat, I'm abandoning standard
> URL encoding (i.e., %2f and all that) and using my own scheme.
>
BTW,
I'm actively working on the issue with URL encoding/decoding. Because
of the differences between Jetty and Tomcat, I'm abandoning standard
URL encoding (i.e., %2f and all that) and using my own scheme.
As a side effect, we can now properly support null and blank string
values in page activa
