-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
MIMEAccept doesn't respect specificity #458
Comments
👍 I just noticed this as well. The |
#205 is kind-of related. |
What is prioritized -- quality or specificity? |
Can we agree that even though |
The regex can't do much about this. This is supposed to be fixed in |
As I understand it, specificity only governs how a representation with a particular media type is associated with a particular media range. So the server application should assign each representation of the current resource it can possibly send to one particular range that was sent in the Quality/weight is only used after that assignment is done. It could have the result of a representation that had a less specific match having a higher quality and being chosen. If so, that's just what the client requested, e.g. I just realized that if more than one representation is assigned to the "winning" range, the server application still has to arbitrarily pick one. Oh, well. |
As for a previous comment of mine:
After trying to implement specificity, i don't think anymore this could be done there. |
Previously, we didn't parse MIME parameters or use them to match or prioritize content types. Now, we'll normalize and compare MIME parameters and consider a MIME type with parameters higher priority than one without them. Fixes pallets#458
Previously, we didn't parse MIME parameters or use them to match or prioritize content types. Now, we'll normalize and compare MIME parameters and consider a MIME type with parameters higher priority than one without them. Fixes pallets#458
Previously, we didn't parse MIME parameters or use them to match or prioritize content types. Now, we'll normalize and compare MIME parameters and consider a MIME type with parameters higher priority than one without them. Fixes pallets#458
Previously, we didn't parse MIME parameters or use them to match or prioritize content types. Now, we'll normalize and compare MIME parameters and consider a MIME type with parameters higher priority than one without them. Fixes pallets#458
Previously, we didn't parse MIME parameters or use them to match or prioritize content types. Now, we'll normalize and compare MIME parameters and consider a MIME type with parameters higher priority than one without them. Fixes pallets#458
Hello!
I've been using the helpful MIMEAccept class in
werkzeug.datastructures
and I noticed that while it does respect quality, it doesn't respect specificity as outlined in RFC 2616.Is this something that people are interested in seeing fixed? I'd be happy to open a pull.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: