- From: Sebastian Pipping <webmaster@hartwork.org>
- Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 16:22:01 +0200
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- CC: uriparser-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, uri@w3.org
Dan Connolly wrote: > I'm curious about motivations behind it. > I read GOALS.txt, but it seems to be more about > coding conventions than motivations. -------------------------------------------------------- For my XSPF playlist handling library libSpiff [1] I needed a strictly RFC 3986 conforming URI parser written in C or C++. What I found was either implementing an older RFC (like libURI [2] and and I think uri [3] as well) or was not mature enough (uriparser before the rewrite). That plus the need for wchar_t support and a BSD-style license... so I tried to fill that gap my own. -------------------------------------------------------- > Also... I see test materials adapted from 4suite... > http://cvs.4suite.org/viewcvs/4Suite/test/Lib/test_uri.py?rev=1.34&view=markup > > It seems a shame that each test is manually migrated from > python to C. It would be nice if we could share test data... > in N3 or JSON or XML format or something and just write > code in each language to parse the test data. -------------------------------------------------------- Good idea! -------------------------------------------------------- > Ah... your project is already linked from the UriTesting wiki topic. > http://esw.w3.org/topic/UriTesting > Looks like Mike Brown added it. -------------------------------------------------------- Cool! :-) Sebastian [1] http://libspiff.sourceforge.net/ [2] http://sourceforge.net/projects/liburi/ [3] http://www.nongnu.org/uri/
Received on Thursday, 13 September 2007 14:22:59 UTC