The URLvalidator was actually designed to be a general URI
validator. It's been a while since I used it but I believe
it should be able to validate 
jdbc:oracle://localhost:3050/mydatabase ?

I believe the scheme is optional.

-Rob


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Bywater [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, April 1, 2004 10:06 PM
> To: 'Struts Developers List'
> Subject: Re: URL validation
> 
> If we're talking URLs aren't we looking at the wrong RFC?  RFC1738 has 
> this section:
> 
> 3.3. HTTP
> 
>    The HTTP URL scheme is used to designate Internet resources
>    accessible using HTTP (HyperText Transfer Protocol).
> 
>    The HTTP protocol is specified elsewhere. This specification only
>    describes the syntax of HTTP URLs.
> 
>    An HTTP URL takes the form:
> 
>       http://<host>:<port>/<path>?<searchpart>
> 
>    where <host> and <port> are as described in Section 3.1. If :<port>
>    is omitted, the port defaults to 80.  No user name or password is
>    allowed.  <path> is an HTTP selector, and <searchpart> is a query
>    string. The <path> is optional, as is the <searchpart> and its
>    preceding "?". If neither <path> nor <searchpart> is present, the "/"
>    may also be omitted.
> 
>    Within the <path> and <searchpart> components, "/", ";", "?" are
>    reserved.  The "/" character may be used within HTTP to designate a
>    hierarchical structure.
> 
> 
> It states that path is optional therefore it would appear to me that 
> http://<host>/?<searchpath> is valid. 
> 
> If we're actually talking URIs my apologies :)
> 
> Richard.
> 
> Adam Hardy wrote:
> 
> >
> > I thought that a slash on the end of a web-address denoted that you 
> > were requesting the default resource at that URI.
> >
> > However I guess that is a very HTTP-centric point of view.
> >
> > So if the RFC leaves it open to interpretation, what does one do?  
> > Veer on the side of leniency?
> >
> > Adam
> >
> >
> > On 04/01/2004 07:50 PM David Morris wrote:
> >
> >> Are you reading something into the spec? It seems like they are
> >> referring to a part of the URL. If not, I am wondering why the RFC shows
> >> examples in section E that do end in a slash.
> >>
> >> "In practice, URI are delimited in a variety of ways, but usually
> >>    within double-quotes "http://test.com/";, angle brackets
> >>    <http://test.com/>, or just using whitespace
> >>
> >>                              http://test.com/
> >>    These wrappers do not form part of the URI."
> >>
> >> David Morris
> >>
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to