Hi All,
Thanks for everyone's feedback on the subject. Much appreciated.
>From a users perspective it would be great if the method explicitly
notified the user if this kind of input was invalid - but if that's
inconsistent with current behaviour across the client I'd be happy with it
being in the javadocs :)
Is this the only boundary case where normalizing relative URI's would fail?
I'm definitely a novice with the httpclient code, but if so, would there be
other unknown issues if we checked for and handled this case ? (in or even
outside of the httpclient code?).
Cheers,
Marcus
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 11:08:58PM -0400, Michael Becke wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 23, 2003, at 06:18 PM, Mike Moran wrote:
> >[Oleg agreed] Right. Out of interest, which set of test cases does the
> >URI class use, the ones from rfc2396 or rfc2396bis?
>
> The tests are from rfc2396bis.
>
> >I would agree. Doesn't this mean that normalize() should thrown an
> >exception if it *is* called on a non-absolute URI?
>
> I don't know if we want to throw an exception. It's not really an
> error case plus it would not be consistent with current behavior. It
> should definitely be documented and we should consider adding a test
> for relative URIs in normalize(). In such a case it would not actually
> attempt normalization. Again I do not think it's an error it is just
> that we do not correctly handle the case currently.
>
> Mike
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
.....
,,$$$$$$$$$, Marcus Crafter
;$' '$$$$: Computer Systems Engineer
$: $$$$: ManageSoft GmbH
$ o_)$$$: 82-84 Mainzer Landstrasse
;$, _/\ &&:' 60327 Frankfurt Germany
' /( &&&
\_&&&&'
&&&&.
&&&&&&&:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
