From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Goaziou Subject: Re: Encoding Problem in export? Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 13:09:05 +0200 Message-ID: <877ggg5i5q.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87bo5s27ey.fsf@sachwertpartner.de> <877ggg7suh.fsf@gmail.com> <51EF32F4.9030309@gmx.de> <87txjk5s2q.fsf@gmail.com> <87a9lcfg9g.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53579) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V1wwA-0006Tl-AX for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 07:08:55 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V1ww9-0000Co-Eq for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 07:08:54 -0400 Received: from mail-wg0-x234.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c00::234]:48456) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V1ww9-0000Cc-8X for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 07:08:53 -0400 Received: by mail-wg0-f52.google.com with SMTP id b13so265540wgh.7 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 04:08:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87a9lcfg9g.fsf@gmail.com> (Nick Dokos's message of "Wed, 24 Jul 2013 05:39:55 -0400") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Nick Dokos Cc: David Maus , emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hello, Nick Dokos writes: > Maybe the thing to do is to delete '=' from org-link-escape-chars and > see what problems arise. AFAICT, `url-encode-url' is subtler than that. It encodes characters whenever they are really forbidden, which is not the case of `org-link-escape'. Hence my initial question: do we need to reinvent the wheel? > But I did find that '%' was originally in org-link-escape-chars and > David Maus hardcoded it (commit 139cc1d4), so that it is *always* > escaped. I Cc David Maus in case he has time to enlighten us about his choice. > I assume there is a good reason for that, but if so, url-encode-url > might not be enough - afaict, it leaves '%' signs alone: Yes, there is a comment in url-util.el: (defconst url-host-allowed-chars ;; Allow % to avoid re-encoding %-encoded sequences. (url--allowed-chars (append '(?% ?! ?$ ?& ?' ?\( ?\) ?* ?+ ?, ?\; ?=) url-unreserved-chars)) "Allowed-character byte mask for the host segment of a URI. These characters are specified in RFC 3986, Appendix A.") Not sure how it could affect URI correctness. I trust "url-util.el" authors, though. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou