Re: [xml] rfc 3986

[Rob Richards <rrichards ctindustries net>]

Daniel Veillard wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 06:42:22AM -0500, Rob Richards wrote:
>   
> > Although not a fatal error, I keep fielding error reports due to the use 
> > of the DAV: uri and was wondering if the attached patch could be slipped in.
> > It is not a complete implementation of rfc 3986, as it is only adding 
> > support for the empty path.
> > Rather than creating a new entry point (unsure if it needs to be a 
> > standalone check) the check was just added within xmlParseAbsoluteURI.
> >     
>
>   If you remove the main motivation factor for doing 3986 properly,
> how do you expect to motivate someone (you, me, someone else) to actually
> spend the time ?
>   
bribery? :D
>   At the moment libxml2 is coherent I think in its 2396 implementation,
> I'm a bit vary of doing minimal half done changes just for convenience.
> I'm not strongly objecting, but I wonder what's the long term impact...
>   
That thought was lingering in the back of my mind too. I have no strong 
feelings on it either way, but thought I'd throw it out there.
Long term impact would be it probably would never get done, but then 
again unless someone has an absolute need for it I would imagine 
everyone has more important uses for their time than a 
non-critical/somewhat involved feature request as well. I have no qualms 
though requesting a patch for the implementation from anyone reporting 
the issue though :)

Rob