I apologize for not being a webmaster, but this (alt.www.webmaster) is one
place where I could really use the help of such. I am in the middle of a
contradiction between Oracle and Microsoft approaches, and I really can't
tell whom to ask for fixing the problem. Here is what's happening:

Oracle creates a link and sends it over email, link which contains
something I summarized below, as far as the point of contention:

https://my_Oracle_server/OA_HTML/RF....=1006322&resp_
id=-1&resp_appl_id=-1&security_group_id=0&lang_code=US&params=...

When the above link is being read in Outlook, it appears exactly as above,
while - when reading it in the Web interface of Exchange 2003 - the &lang
is being replaced by %3C, then - upon opening the browser with such link -
gets translated into an < sign.

Now - the problem is that Microsoft says that this is normal behavior for
their web-based interface, and is asking Oracle to change the &lang to
something not "reserved" (I have found some references to this at:

http://www.evolt.org/article/ala/17/21234/ )

while Oracle says: if you (Microsoft) do not damage the link in Outlook
client (HTML based), why would you interpret it in your web part?

Any opinions on how this could be solved? Microsoft states that a change
at their end will require building a "custom" Exchange component ($$$$),
while Oracle says that Microsoft's design is the only one interpreting the
&lang to a < ...

TIA,
Papi

papi <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:

> I apologize for not being a webmaster, but this (alt.www.webmaster) is
> one place where I could really use the help of such. I am in the
> middle of a contradiction between Oracle and Microsoft approaches, and
> I really can't tell whom to ask for fixing the problem. Here is what's
> happening:
>
> Oracle creates a link and sends it over email, link which contains
> something I summarized below, as far as the point of contention:
>
> https://my_Oracle_server/OA_HTML/RF....=1006322&resp_
> id=-1&resp_appl_id=-1&security_group_id=0&lang_code=US&params=...

If the message is plain text, the & is ok. If it's HTML, the & *must* be
turned into &amp;

> When the above link is being read in Outlook, it appears exactly as
> above, while - when reading it in the Web interface of Exchange 2003 -
> the &lang is being replaced by %3C, then - upon opening the browser
> with such link - gets translated into an < sign.

If the email is plain text, the web interface *should* change the & into
&amp; before displaying it.

--
John Need help with SEO? Get started with a SEO report of your site:

--> http://johnbokma.com/websitedesign/seo-expert-help.html

On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 17:02:36 +0000, John Bokma wrote:

> papi <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:
>
>> I apologize for not being a webmaster, but this (alt.www.webmaster) is
>> one place where I could really use the help of such. I am in the
>> middle of a contradiction between Oracle and Microsoft approaches, and
>> I really can't tell whom to ask for fixing the problem. Here is what's
>> happening:
>>
>> Oracle creates a link and sends it over email, link which contains
>> something I summarized below, as far as the point of contention:
>>
>> https://my_Oracle_server/OA_HTML/RF....=1006322&resp_
>> id=-1&resp_appl_id=-1&security_group_id=0&lang_code=US&params=...
>
> If the message is plain text, the & is ok. If it's HTML, the & *must* be
> turned into &amp;
>
>> When the above link is being read in Outlook, it appears exactly as
>> above, while - when reading it in the Web interface of Exchange 2003 -
>> the &lang is being replaced by %3C, then - upon opening the browser
>> with such link - gets translated into an < sign.
>
> If the email is plain text, the web interface *should* change the & into
> &amp; before displaying it.

Thank you for your reply. From your comments, above, I understand that
the email - if plain text - *should* (but not *must* or *shall*, as in
HTML) - is this a correct interpretation? ... and, if so, whom should I
ask for a change, then - MS or Oracle?

Papi

papi <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:

> On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 17:02:36 +0000, John Bokma wrote:
>
>> papi <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:
>>
>>> I apologize for not being a webmaster, but this (alt.www.webmaster)
>>> is one place where I could really use the help of such. I am in the
>>> middle of a contradiction between Oracle and Microsoft approaches,
>>> and I really can't tell whom to ask for fixing the problem. Here is
>>> what's happening:
>>>
>>> Oracle creates a link and sends it over email, link which contains
>>> something I summarized below, as far as the point of contention:
>>>
>>> https://my_Oracle_server/OA_HTML/RF....=1006322&resp_
>>> id=-1&resp_appl_id=-1&security_group_id=0&lang_code=US&params=...
>>
>> If the message is plain text, the & is ok. If it's HTML, the & *must*
>> be turned into &amp;
>>
>>> When the above link is being read in Outlook, it appears exactly as
>>> above, while - when reading it in the Web interface of Exchange 2003
>>> - the &lang is being replaced by %3C, then - upon opening the
>>> browser with such link - gets translated into an < sign.
>>
>> If the email is plain text, the web interface *should* change the &
>> into &amp; before displaying it.
>
> Thank you for your reply. From your comments, above, I understand that
> the email - if plain text - *should* (but not *must* or *shall*, as in
> HTML)


No, plain text *must not* change the & into &amp;

> - is this a correct interpretation? ... and, if so, whom should
> I ask for a change, then - MS or Oracle?

If the email is HTML, and in the HTML source you see &lang then the sender
of the email is wrong. You probably can check this by viewing the source
of the HTML and copy pasting it to a text file which you save as HTML and
validate with the w3c validator. If it starts to complain about the &lang
in the URL, you have proof that the sender is wrong.

If it's plain text, then MS is doing things wrong.

--
John Need help with SEO? Get started with a SEO report of your site:

--> http://johnbokma.com/websitedesign/seo-expert-help.html

On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 17:37:12 +0000, John Bokma wrote:
<snip>
>
> If the email is HTML, and in the HTML source you see &lang then the sender
> of the email is wrong. You probably can check this by viewing the source
> of the HTML and copy pasting it to a text file which you save as HTML and
> validate with the w3c validator. If it starts to complain about the &lang
> in the URL, you have proof that the sender is wrong.
>
> If it's plain text, then MS is doing things wrong.

Thank you!