Fixed unencoded space character in example #200

pull kallerosenbaum wants to merge 4 commits into bitcoin:master from kallerosenbaum:master changing 1 files +2 −3
  1. kallerosenbaum commented at 1:16 PM on September 17, 2015: contributor

    No description provided.

  2. Fixed unencoded space character in example 10173c76cc
  3. in bip-0121.mediawiki:None in 10173c76cc outdated
     114 | @@ -115,7 +115,7 @@ Send PoP for a transaction with label "video 42923" to
     115 |  <nowiki>https://www.example.com/pop/352</nowiki>, using nonce
     116 |  <tt>0x73 0xd5 0x1a 0xbb 0xd8 0x9c</tt>:
     117 |  <pre>
     118 | - btcpop:?p=https://www.example.com/pop/352&n=zgWTm8yH&label=video 42923
     119 | + btcpop:?p=https://www.example.com/pop/352&n=zgWTm8yH&label=video%2042923
    


    luke-jr commented at 1:24 AM on September 19, 2015:

    The correct way to encode a space is usually '+'


    dabura667 commented at 1:26 AM on September 19, 2015:

    @luke-jr Are there browsers that don't support %20?


    kallerosenbaum commented at 5:27 AM on September 19, 2015:

    Why is '+' a valid encoding for ' ' (space) in bitcoin: URIs? Isn't that a URL encoding thing? I think there is nothing in RFC 3986 about that, nor in BIP21? I think '+' means '+' in RFC 3986.

    However '+' is interpreted as space (' ') by most wallets (that I tried), but I do think it's a mistake to do so.


    luke-jr commented at 2:43 PM on September 19, 2015:

    AFAIK '+' is the same style of encoding as "%20"


    kallerosenbaum commented at 5:53 AM on September 21, 2015:

    I can't find anything in the specifications (BIP21 and RFC 3986) saying that space can be encoded with '+'. Please tell me where I can find that.

  4. Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' 2c56c21af1
  5. Removing unnecessary http header Content-Transfer-Encoding. That is only used for e-mail. e313067d01
  6. Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' 0224692887
  7. kallerosenbaum commented at 9:00 AM on October 22, 2015: contributor

    Is there something holding this back?

  8. schildbach commented at 9:31 AM on October 22, 2015: contributor

    %20 is fine as well. I'm not sure where the '+' convention comes from, maybe it's just a convention that was never formally standardized.

  9. luke-jr added the label Proposed BIP modification on Oct 23, 2015
  10. luke-jr referenced this in commit b20cfdb9d8 on Oct 23, 2015
  11. luke-jr merged this on Oct 23, 2015
  12. luke-jr closed this on Oct 23, 2015

  13. luke-jr referenced this in commit 80688d7900 on Jan 20, 2018

github-metadata-mirror

This is a metadata mirror of the GitHub repository bitcoin/bips. This site is not affiliated with GitHub. Content is generated from a GitHub metadata backup.
generated: 2026-04-14 11:10 UTC

This site is hosted by @0xB10C
More mirrored repositories can be found on mirror.b10c.me