Dan, I understand though I don't see anything in the JDBC specification requiring spaces be allowed in a jdbc: scheme URL. Did I miss something?
My question was about a change which seems unnecessary moving the jdbc:derby: scheme /further/ from RFC 3986. The incompatibility with earlier Derby versions makes matters worse. thanx, doug On 8/23/06, Daniel John Debrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Doug Bunting wrote: > Deepa, > > Is there an extra "not" in your comments? I don't understand how a > fix could involve removing the ability to parse standard URL escape > sequences. Spaces are not valid[1] in URIs and therefore are > disallowed in URLs. JDBC URLs are not standard URIs, JDBC 4.0 has this: <quote> Note – A JDBC URL is not required to fully adhere to the URI syntax as defined in RFC 3986, Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax. </quote> Dan.
