Parsing URL attributes - url-mailto, url-imap, url-ldap broken?

Parsing URL attributes - url-mailto, url-imap, url-ldap broken?

[Diane Murray]

I just noticed that `url-mailto' doesn't parse URLs with query
arguments like it used to.  If I call
(url-retrieve-synchronously "mailto:ml+atest@x3y2z1.net?subject=testing")
the word "testing" should be inserted in the Subject field, but it
isn't.  In Emacs CVS of 2006-09-19 it does that.  I'm assuming after
because of the following changes, now it doesn't:

  2006-10-09  Magnus Henoch  <mange@freemail.hu>

          * url-parse.el (url-generic-parse-url): Handle URLs with empty
          path component and non-empty query component.  Untangle path,
          query and fragment parsing code.  Add references to RFC 3986 in
          comments.
          (url-recreate-url-attributes): Start query string with "?", not ";".

I think `url-imap' and `url-ldap' won't work correctly either, from
what I've seen in the source code.

Since the change was probably made to parse http query strings better,
and there is no such use of url-attributes in url-http.el, I believe
it should be safe to somehow revert to the old way, since many of the
other url scheme files depend on that way of doing things.

--
Diane Murray

Re: Parsing URL attributes - url-mailto, url-imap, url-ldap broken?

[Chong Yidong]

Diane Murray <disumu@x3y2z1.net> writes:

> I just noticed that `url-mailto' doesn't parse URLs with query
> arguments like it used to.  If I call
> (url-retrieve-synchronously "mailto:ml+atest@x3y2z1.net?subject=testing")
> the word "testing" should be inserted in the Subject field, but it
> isn't.  In Emacs CVS of 2006-09-19 it does that.  I'm assuming after
> because of the following changes, now it doesn't:
>
>   2006-10-09  Magnus Henoch  <mange@freemail.hu>
>
>           * url-parse.el (url-generic-parse-url): Handle URLs with empty
>           path component and non-empty query component.  Untangle path,
>           query and fragment parsing code.  Add references to RFC 3986 in
>           comments.
>           (url-recreate-url-attributes): Start query string with "?", not ";".
>
> I think `url-imap' and `url-ldap' won't work correctly either, from
> what I've seen in the source code.
>
> Since the change was probably made to parse http query strings better,
> and there is no such use of url-attributes in url-http.el, I believe
> it should be safe to somehow revert to the old way, since many of the
> other url scheme files depend on that way of doing things.

I agree.

Re: Parsing URL attributes - url-mailto, url-imap, url-ldap broken?

[Richard Stallman]

Is anyone working on this?


Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 17:02:56 +0200
From: Diane Murray <disumu@x3y2z1.net>
To: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Parsing URL attributes - url-mailto, url-imap, url-ldap broken?

I just noticed that `url-mailto' doesn't parse URLs with query
arguments like it used to.  If I call
(url-retrieve-synchronously "mailto:ml+atest@x3y2z1.net?subject=testing")
the word "testing" should be inserted in the Subject field, but it
isn't.  In Emacs CVS of 2006-09-19 it does that.  I'm assuming after
because of the following changes, now it doesn't:

  2006-10-09  Magnus Henoch  <mange@freemail.hu>

          * url-parse.el (url-generic-parse-url): Handle URLs with empty
          path component and non-empty query component.  Untangle path,
          query and fragment parsing code.  Add references to RFC 3986 in
          comments.
          (url-recreate-url-attributes): Start query string with "?", not ";".

I think `url-imap' and `url-ldap' won't work correctly either, from
what I've seen in the source code.

Since the change was probably made to parse http query strings better,
and there is no such use of url-attributes in url-http.el, I believe
it should be safe to somehow revert to the old way, since many of the
other url scheme files depend on that way of doing things.

--
Diane Murray


_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel

Re: Parsing URL attributes - url-mailto, url-imap, url-ldap broken?

[Chong Yidong]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

> Is anyone working on this?

AFAICT, Diane Murray's analysis is correct.  The 2006-10-09 change was
intended to parse http query strings better, but url-http apparently
doesn't use the result; on the other hand, url-mailto and other parts
of url that depended on the old behavior got broken.

Since Magnus Henoch has not responded, I went ahead and reverted the
patch that caused this problem.  After the release, we can re-apply
the patch, and adapt url-mailto etc to the new behavior of
url-generic-parse-url.

> Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 17:02:56 +0200
> From: Diane Murray <disumu@x3y2z1.net>
> To: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Subject: Parsing URL attributes - url-mailto, url-imap, url-ldap broken?
>
> I just noticed that `url-mailto' doesn't parse URLs with query
> arguments like it used to.  If I call
> (url-retrieve-synchronously "mailto:ml+atest@x3y2z1.net?subject=testing")
> the word "testing" should be inserted in the Subject field, but it
> isn't.  In Emacs CVS of 2006-09-19 it does that.  I'm assuming after
> because of the following changes, now it doesn't:
>
>   2006-10-09  Magnus Henoch  <mange@freemail.hu>
>
>           * url-parse.el (url-generic-parse-url): Handle URLs with empty
>           path component and non-empty query component.  Untangle path,
>           query and fragment parsing code.  Add references to RFC 3986 in
>           comments.
>           (url-recreate-url-attributes): Start query string with "?", not ";".
>
> I think `url-imap' and `url-ldap' won't work correctly either, from
> what I've seen in the source code.
>
> Since the change was probably made to parse http query strings better,
> and there is no such use of url-attributes in url-http.el, I believe
> it should be safe to somehow revert to the old way, since many of the
> other url scheme files depend on that way of doing things.

Re: Parsing URL attributes - url-mailto, url-imap, url-ldap broken?

[Richard Stallman]

Thanks for dealing with this.