On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Gilles Detillieux wrote:
> I think this is the case for all versions of htdig since local_urls was
> added in the early 3.1.x betas.
Yes. The local_urls support is not very smart and certainly it would be
nice to get it working through the file:// support in the 3.2 code (which
will also have this problem).
> On the other hand, hex encoding would be easier, as that's normally
> left up to the HTTP server. The local_urls handling would be able to
> destinguish between an unencoded "?" and a "%3F" quite easily. Up to
> version 3.1.4, it didn't do any decoding of these, though, so they
> would likely have failed and fallen back to HTTP. As of version 3.1.5,
> it decodes these for the whole URL, so if we were to add a test for a
> query string, it should be before the hex-decoding.
I think a legitimate "?" in a URL just needs to be hex-encoded (sorry if I
misspoke before). Of course I've been quite tempted to change the URL
parser to add in a "query" field which would make many of these issues
easier.
--
-Geoff Hutchison
Williams Students Online
http://wso.williams.edu/
_______________________________________________
htdig-general mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Information: http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/htdig-general
FAQ: http://htdig.sourceforge.net/FAQ.html
