On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 09:17:23AM +0100, Oleksandr Shulgin wrote:
> At the same time, we could still be more specific if we would say
> "delimiters" instead of the generic "special meaning". Should we then
> provide an exhaustive list of delimiters or is it clear enough like that?
> For example, the whitespace doesn't need to be percent-encoded (it doesn't
> hurt as you might be able to spare the quoting if using it as an argument
> to a shell command), while the "equal sign", when used in the query string
> part, does need encoding.
This term comes from you, as of 2d612ab, and that does not look like
something to change because reserved characters have "sometimes" a
special meaning in this context. A reference to the RFC is sufficient
IMO, readers could always look at that reference for a precise list
and that would bloat the docs more than necessary.
--
Michael