On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 7:39 PM, Graham Dumpleton
<graham.dumpleton@gmai...> wrote:
> I note one issue which I have expressed concern over previously. In
> section 'Handling the Content-Length Header; it says:
>
> """
> Under some circumstances, however, the server or gateway may be able
> to either generate a Content-Length header, or at least avoid the need
> to close the client connection. If the application does not call the
> write() callable, and returns an iterable whose len() is 1, then the
> server can automatically determine Content-Length by taking the length
> of the first bytestring yielded by the iterable.
> """

That is copied exactly from PEP 333, i.e. WSGI 1.0. I didn't mean to
solicit objections to parts of PEP 3333 that are the same as PEP 333;
PEP 3333 is intended only to specify how WSGI 1.0 compliance is
supposed to work in Python 3. Some clarifications to the original WSGI
1.0 wordings were actually added to PEP 333 around the same time that
PEP 3333 was spun off; AFAIK the changes to PEP 333 were
noncontroversial and merely clarifications of how WSGI already works.
I don't think you can change the above bit of specification (no matter
how bad it is) and still call the resulting spec WSGI 1.0(.x) -- we
don't want to rule out WSGI 1.0 compliance of apps or frameworks that
would be considered compliant under the original 1.0 spec.

--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
_______________________________________________
Web-SIG mailing list
Web-SIG@pyth...
Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/subscriber%40opensubscriber.com