Daniel Vainsencher <danielv at netvision.net.il> wrote:
> Sounds to me like maybe we should be looking the the URI package, which
> is after all claimed to be rfc compliant. Has anyone already done this? 
> 

This is a demoralizing suggestion.  The URL library in Squeak
is quite RFC compliant. Are people not aware of that?  Just consider
the small number of bug reports that have come out regarding URL's,
compared to the five years they have been in service.

I poured over the RFC's and made Squeak URL's much more compliant
than was necessary at the time.  Like SMTP, POP, and MIME, (which
also have good track records!), this is a utility library that is likely
to see a variety of abusive input over time.  It's the kind
of thing where it's worth putting in the effort to make *every* input
be handled in the appropriate way.  I made that effort, and I
believe it shows.

Maybe there is another reason to use the URI package, but RFC compliance
isn't it.

Lex