W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > February 2003

Re: URI test cases?

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 09:17:57 -0600
To: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Cc: uri@w3.org
Message-id: <1046099876.11204.409.camel@dirk.dm93.org>

On Thu, 2003-02-20 at 12:08, Graham Klyne wrote:
> At 10:27 AM 2/19/03 -0600, Dan Connolly wrote:
> >On Wed, 2003-02-19 at 09:20, Graham Klyne wrote:
> > > Is there a suite of test cases for URis, covering basic syntax, finding
> > > relative forms, finding absolute forms, etc.?
> >
> >Good question.
> >
> >I keep a set of test cases in
> >   http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/uripath.py
> 
> Maybe a couple of others to consider?:
> 
>    "http://example/x/y%2Fz"  "http://example/x/abc"      "abc"
>    "http://example/x/y/z"    "http://example/x%2Fabc"    "../../x%2Fabc"
>    "http://example/x/y%2Fz"  "http://example/x%2Fabc"    "../x%2Fabc"
>    "http://example/x%2Fy/z"  "http://example/x%2Fy/abc"  "abc"

OK, I added these, after a tweak...

TimBL prefers root-relative paths, i.e. "/x%2Fabc"
to "../../x%2Fabc"
Both are correct relative paths from here to there,
but our code currently does "/x%2Fabc".

I don't really like it; it doesn't support moving
filesets around as well as it could. But I haven't
convinced timbl, nor have I completely debugged
an algorithm for returning "../../x%2Fabc".


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Monday, 24 February 2003 10:21:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:15:31 GMT