M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
c) Should username and password be used similar to other protocols?
 pydbapi:<modulepath>://[<username>:<password>@]<host>[:
<port>/


This is not URI conformant (AFAIK): you cannot have multiple
schemes separated by colons.

pydbapi-<modulepath>://...

Well, I think it's up to scheme to parse the rest of the URI, so the scheme would be "pydbapi", and it in turn would parse out the module. I think this would be more compliant than:


would work, e.g.

pydbapi-mx.ODBC.Windows://<uid>:<pwd>@sqlserver.example.com/?DATABASE=test

Which really puts something more data-like into the scheme. But then I still prefer using a plain module name, like:


mxODBC://user:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/database?params

Of course, I do believe it's illegal to have punctuation in the scheme as well... well, I guess not, according to this: http://www.w3.org/Addressing/URL/5_URI_BNF.html

While it's nice to be able to find modules given a URI (without preloading any modules) I must admit I am rather reluctant to burden users with what I consider to be internal organizations, like mx.ODBC.Windows, or a particular Postgres driver.

Looking at this URI I don't think that the URI-approach is
going to make things any easier for the user in setting up
things.

Well, I can say that *I* find them very useful and comfortable when configuring SQLObject, even though I initially didn't think they were that important. I suspect that the effect would actually be magnified for someone with less experience using Python database drivers.


--
Ian Bicking  /  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  /  http://blog.ianbicking.org
_______________________________________________
DB-SIG maillist  -  [email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/db-sig

Reply via email to