[spec] Oustanding issues

[Sean Conner]

It was thus said that the Great Solderpunk once stated:
> On Sun Dec 27, 2020 at 6:54 PM CET, Johann Galle wrote:
> 
> > As you have now mentioned these two issues, there was a mail with these
> > two and another issue[1], namely if lone LFs (or lone CRs or other line
> > breaking code points for that matter) are allowed inside META.
> >
> > [1] https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/2020/003276.html
> 
> Hmm.  Currently this is perfectly legal.  I agree that it's not unlikely
> there will be hastily written clients which don't handle it correctly
> (although it could easily be included in Sean's torture test suite), but
> I'm not sure that's a reason in and of itself to forbid it.  Can anybody
> think of any any strong arguments in either direction?

  Okay, this is about:

	10 Is\nThis\nValid?\r\n

  While this is valid per the spec, I would recommend against embedded
control codes in the META response.  Arbitrary control codes can do some
pretty nasty things [1], and this can potentially mess up a client's
display.  Clients (in my opinion) should strip out such sequences, if only
because this is trying to influence how the client display text.

  -spc

[1]	Redefine the keyboard, issue commands to the operating system,
	application or device for instance.  I don't know of any current
	terminal software that support the commands, but I do know of at
	least one operating system where you can redefined the keyboard via
	control codes, and it's a very popular operating system.  Like,
	*the* most popular operating system.