Re: [xml] rfc 3986

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 :)


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]