Re: [web-devel] Proposal: http-types

2011/2/3 Gregory Collins

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Aristid Breitkreuz wrote:

...

I did not even claim that I want to ditch CIByteString, just that I am unsure how to proceed with it. Note that you yourself do not even use CIByteString consistently: You use it for the header names in WAI, but not for Method, and not at all in http-enumerator.

According to the spec, methods are not case-insensitive, the defined ones are explicitly uppercase and "extension-method" has type "token", see RFC 2616 section 5.1.1. Headers *are* case-insensitive (see section 4.2) so it's convenient to treat them as such in datatypes, especially where lookup is concerned -- hence CIByteString.

Oh, sorry, my mistake. I thought both were case-insensitive and failed to look it up.

Re: method, Snap uses a datatype because 5.1.1 gives an explicit enumeration, but you could do it either way and have a reasonable rationale.

True. I am not really attached to either approach, even if it may have seemed differently, I just need explanations. So, I think for now I may just implement both variants, and provide conversion functions. Aristid