On Sun, 2 Apr 2006, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: > Paul Jimenez wrote: >> Announcing uriparse.py, submitted for inclusion in the standard library. >> Patch request 1462525. [...] > abstractions"; however, this didn't mean anything to me. Saying > "urlparse doesn't comply with STD66 (aka RFC3986) because > it hard-codes URI schemes, instead of applying the same > syntax to all of them" is something I would have understood > as a problem. Evidently Paul quickly realised that back at the time of the original thread: hence the lack of posts from Paul protesting at Guido & Mike Brown's explanations, and the appearance now of this nice module :-) > So in short: are you willing to write documentation for this? > The rationale section could either go into the urllib documentation > (pointing out that particular problem, and referring to urilib > as an improvement) Currently of course we have both the functions in urllib, plus module urlparse. This module is roughly a replacement for urlparse. Probably if this module is accepted (after a few changes, no doubt) the urllib functions should then be deprecated (which would probably trigger adding a few more functions to the new module). I guess module urlparse would also be deprecated. I have a list of concrete and mostly easily-resolved problems with the module (including not liking the name). I also suspect there are issues related to unicode, %-encoding &c. exist which should be resolved before including this in the stdlib; I won't comment further on that until I've read the relevant RFCs. I've posted detailed comments on the tracker. John
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4