Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:126908
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3826.400.131.1.6\))
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Potential RFC: mb_rawurlencode() ?
In-Reply-To: <36e83b76-6bab-42a3-9c5d-07a35d43851f@rwec.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2025 11:08:54 -0500
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <4D8DD31A-E982-4D63-8671-2A35A886C609@pmjones.io>
References: <C47E5955-E75E-49A7-88D3-6957669057F0@pmjones.io>
 <CAEPPVa1p9tiTZLs69Mjo05KTyLi2RwLJ+Z4SSWKEwCZdR9RnOw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEPPVa38tgc=K5Hgcf+-d7JNfi+v97fjFQpwA0J7cOMCz1FxNw@mail.gmail.com>
 <EEC27D2D-BDBE-41F4-95F1-45EBD0B328BC@pmjones.io>
 <c0b86fc1b3a5eb1d144f80c931febeaa@bastelstu.be>
 <36e83b76-6bab-42a3-9c5d-07a35d43851f@rwec.co.uk>
To: "Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]" <imsop.php@rwec.co.uk>
From: pmjones@pmjones.io ("Paul M. Jones")

Hi Rowan & all,

> On Mar 22, 2025, at 10:20, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] =
<imsop.php@rwec.co.uk> wrote:
>=20
> On 21/03/2025 11:17, Tim D=C3=BCsterhus wrote:
>>=20
>> I am not sure if that signature makes sense and if the proposed =
functionality fits into mbstring for that reason. IRIs are defined as =
UTF-8, any other encoding results in invalid output / results that are =
not interoperable.
>=20
> This confirms a nagging feeling I had when I first saw the thread: the =
name "mb_rawurlencode" implies "do the same things as rawurlencode, but =
for multi-byte strings", but that's not what is being proposed.

[snip]

No argument; my point is more "if we are going to do IRI and WHATWG-URL, =
we're going to need some additional support functionality around =
encoding component values for them." How that is achieved is up for =
grabs. If this discussion has revealed a tentative consensus that it =
needs to happen, I consider it a success.

Next up: what exactly should the API around this functionality look =
like?  I suggested functions but that's clearly a non-starter; what do =
we feel is a good alternative, and can it be achieved independently from =
(but in support of) the URI+WHATWG-URL proposal?


-- pmj