Re: Format of the INPUT TextArea
Rick Troth <troth@rice.edu>
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 1994 02:16:42 +0200
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Message-id: <Pine.3.07.9404221950.B12712-b100000@brazos.is.rice.edu>
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Reply-To: troth@rice.edu
Originator: www-talk@info.cern.ch
Sender: www-talk@www0.cern.ch
Precedence: bulk
From: Rick Troth <troth@rice.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www0.cern.ch>
Subject: Re: Format of the INPUT TextArea
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Mime-Version: 1.0
Mime-Version: 1.0
> I've been fiddling around with a server that uses forms. When I send
> the default text that starts in the textarea, I do so with CRLF's. When I
> get the text back from NCSA Mosaic for X, I get my CRLF's for any unmodified
> text plus LF's for any newly added lines. It's easy to handle this, just use
> the LF's as delimiters and throw out any CR's. But what's going to happen when
> NCSA Mosaic 2.0 for the Mac comes out? Do I need to start looking for CR, LF,
> or CRLF's?
I like to stick to the TELNET standard, CR/LF delimited lines.
Then run by the ROT, "be liberal about what you accept, conservative
about what you generate". So I'd say your server's on the right track.
> What should the standard be? CRLF's like the TELNET RFC, converted
> locally to whatever's convenient?
Right. I used to maintain a system that didn't use CR or
LF or NL or *anything* for the line delimiter. Lines were delimited
out of band, so you could have embedded CRs and/or LFs. It didn't care.
But it's much less confusing to use CR/LF "on the wire".
> --
> daves@vt.edu (Dave Sisson)
--
"There's just some things that numbers can't measure" - Bob Bennett
Rick Troth <troth@rice.edu>, Rice University, Information Systems