What about other invalid characters? We don't need extra validation
imho. Claus figured out pretty quickly what was wrong. I would assume
other users won't have a hard time with what Camel offers already.
I'd like to keep Camel lean.
What I would like to see though is more tools. Those *should*
validate as well as possible that a url is correct.
My $0.02,
Hadrian
On Nov 18, 2008, at 7:55 AM, Jon Anstey wrote:
Good point Hadrian. Also maybe somebody out there is depending on this
functionality? Maybe we could just log a warning if we see a second
'?'
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 3:07 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My personal preference would be to not add extra validation. The
main
reason is that there are quite a few other characters that are not
allowed
either ('=' for instance) and in the general case url (semantical)
validation is not an easy thing to do (i.e. the benefit would be
quite
limited imho). The url parser did the right thing, and I think we
could
rely on developers testing their apps and make sure that the url
they pass
is indeed the intended one.
So a non-binding -1 from me.
Cheers
Hadrian
On Nov 16, 2008, at 9:23 AM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
Hi
I was messing CAMEL-1096 for camel-mail and I mistyped the URI
adding
a 2nd ? char in the URI string.
However this one passes the validation. I was wondering if that
normal?
eg:
pop3://localhost?username=james&mail.pop3.forgettopheaders=true?
ddd=sss
Would validate into 2 parameters
username=james
mail.pop3.forgettopheaders=true?ddd=sss
So the 2nd parameter value is: true?ddd=sss
I was wondering if we should add some validation that a 2nd ? is not
allowed in the URI string?
/Claus Ibsen
Apache Camel Committer
Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
--
Cheers,
Jon
http://janstey.blogspot.com/
