Michał Kowalkowski

@xero You are right - it would be easier. I can only say to that, what I said to "dimasmagadan" in my post before.
If you do not care how the url will look like, then functions you proposed are valid and much easier solution.

@dimasmagadan You raise a valid point. Functions you mention are a good way to encode string to be used in url.
Why I use my method is because I like more control over how the url will look like.
I think "this-is-some-text-with-tab-new-line-and-lot-of-spaces" is a little more elegant than "+This+Is+Some%2FText+with%09tab%0Anew+line+and+lot+of+++++++spaces%0A".
Also by using regex you can easily customize my method and specify how you want it to handle special characters like ? & or dots.