➜
This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
Created on 2016-02-18 12:27 by Serhiy Int, last changed 2022-04-11 14:58 by admin.
| Messages (2) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| msg260475 - (view) | Author: SilentGhost (SilentGhost) *  |
Date: 2016-02-18 18:50 | |
Here is the spec: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5870#section-3.3 |
|||
| msg260495 - (view) | Author: Martin Panter (martin.panter) *  |
Date: 2016-02-19 01:37 | |
Sounds reasonable to me, and thanks for the reference. But it would be nice to find a way for this to work sensibly with arbitrary schemes, in the same spirit as Issue 18828. Would it break anything if we removed the uses_params list altogether? I notice it already works if you omit the scheme: >>> urlparse("48.198634,16.371648;crs=wgs84") ParseResult(scheme='', netloc='', path='48.198634,16.371648', params='crs=wgs84', query='', fragment='') If a programmer doesn’t want to split of the “params” they can always use urlsplit() instead of urlparse(). |
|||
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2022-04-11 14:58:27 | admin | set | github: 70569 |
| 2016-02-19 01:37:59 | martin.panter | set | nosy:
+ martin.panter messages: + msg260495 type: enhancement stage: needs patch |
| 2016-02-18 18:50:06 | SilentGhost | set | nosy:
+ SilentGhost, orsenthil messages: + msg260475 |
| 2016-02-18 12:27:14 | Serhiy Int | create | |