[issue14072] urlparse on tel: URI-s misses the scheme in some cases

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: For the record, urlparse still doesn't handle bare tel URIs such as tel:1234: parse.urlparse(tel:1234) ParseResult(scheme='', netloc='', path='tel:1234', params='', query='', fragment='') This is not terribly important since these URLs are not RFC

[issue14072] urlparse on tel: URI-s misses the scheme in some cases

Ezio Melotti ezio.melo...@gmail.com added the comment: According to RFC 1808 [0], the netloc must follow //, so this doesn't seem to apply to 'tel' URIs. [0]: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1808.html#section-2.1 -- ___ Python tracker

[issue14072] urlparse on tel: URI-s misses the scheme in some cases

Roundup Robot devn...@psf.upfronthosting.co.za added the comment: New changeset ff0fd7b26219 by Ezio Melotti in branch '2.7': #14072: Fix parsing of tel URIs in urlparse by making the check for ports stricter. http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/ff0fd7b26219 New changeset 9f6b7576c08c by Ezio

[issue14072] urlparse on tel: URI-s misses the scheme in some cases

Changes by Ezio Melotti ezio.melo...@gmail.com: -- resolution: - fixed stage: commit review - committed/rejected status: open - closed ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue14072

[issue14072] urlparse on tel: URI-s misses the scheme in some cases

Senthil Kumaran sent...@uthcode.com added the comment: Hi Ezio, The patch is fine and the check is correct. I was thinking if by removing int() based verification are we missing out anything on port number check. But looks like we wont as the int() previously is done to find the proper scheme

[issue14072] urlparse on tel: URI-s misses the scheme in some cases

Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment: it would helpful to add 'tel' to uses_netloc How so? The tel scheme does not use a netloc. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue14072

[issue14072] urlparse on tel: URI-s misses the scheme in some cases

Ezio Melotti ezio.melo...@gmail.com added the comment: In the patch I'm assuming that the port number can only contain ascii digits RFC 3986 [0] defines the port as port = *DIGIT and part of the authority [1] as authority = [ userinfo @ ] host [ : port ] userinfo =

[issue14072] urlparse on tel: URI-s misses the scheme in some cases

R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment: See also issue 14036. -- nosy: +r.david.murray ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue14072 ___

[issue14072] urlparse on tel: URI-s misses the scheme in some cases

Ezio Melotti ezio.melo...@gmail.com added the comment: Here's a possible patch. The problem is that urlsplit (in Lib/urllib/parse.py:348) tries to convert the part after the : (in this case +31-641044153 and +31641044153) to int to see if it's a port number. This doesn't work with

[issue14072] urlparse on tel: URI-s misses the scheme in some cases

Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment: urlparse doesn’t actually implement generic parsing rules according to the most recent RFCs; it has hard-coded registries of supported schemes. tel is not currently supported. That said, it’s strange that the parsing differs in your two

[issue14072] urlparse on tel: URI-s misses the scheme in some cases

Changes by Ivan Herman ivan.her...@cwi.nl: -- components: None nosy: ivan_herman priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: urlparse on tel: URI-s misses the scheme in some cases type: behavior versions: Python 2.7 ___ Python tracker

[issue14072] urlparse on tel: URI-s misses the scheme in some cases

New submission from Ivan Herman ivan.her...@cwi.nl: I think that the screen dump below is fairly clear: 10:41 Ivan python Python 2.7.2 (v2.7.2:8527427914a2, Jun 11 2011, 15:22:34) [GCC 4.2.1 (Apple Inc. build 5666) (dot 3)] on darwin Type help, copyright, credits or license for more

[issue14072] urlparse on tel: URI-s misses the scheme in some cases

Changes by Senthil Kumaran sent...@uthcode.com: -- assignee: - orsenthil nosy: +orsenthil ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue14072 ___