> Question 3)
> Changing the UrlValidator should be a matter of getting the regular
> expression correct I believe(?) for the empty path parts.
> One thought I had on port validation was to attempt to construct a
> java.net.URL and do something like
2 problems with thatg:
1 ) I believe there is no URL validation under JDK 1.3,
there was even a comment about how validation would
be a good thing to add. So it probably passes to underlying
OS to see if it fails.
2) For maintainability its best if the JS & Java methods mirror one another.
True there is no JS URLValidator but if there were then it would have to
rely on RegEx, so why not just stick with that method.
>
> if (u.getPort() < 0 && u.getDefaultPort() < 0) {
> return false;
> }
> which I think would mean the protocol handler for the scheme has a known
> default port. Does this sound like a good approach? or is there a case where
> someone has a protocol handler with default port that java.net.URL wouldn't
> know about? Or a case where java.net.URL is going to throw
> MalFormedUrlException where UrlValidator.isValid would otherwise return
> true?
>
> NP on the 1.1.4 status for me. If getting patches in can get it to 1.1.3
> that'd be good too, either way.
> Thanks,
> -TR
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
