Senthil Kumaran <orsent...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 09, 2010 at 02:23:40PM +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > > > Is this is valid ftp url? > > > > > > # file://ftp.example.com/blah.txt (an ftp URL) > > > > > > My answer is no. When we have the scheme specifically mentioned as > > > file:// it is no point in considering it as ftp url (which should > > > start with ftp://). > > > > I agree. Just because the host is *called* ftp doesn't mean you should > > use the ftp protocol to get the file. > > It was not just for the host being called ftp.example.com > > It was for a pattern that file:/// is local file (correct) and > file://localhost/somepath is again local file (correct again) but > file://anyhost.domain/file.txt is actually ftp (pretty weird).
RFC 1738 explicitly says that "file://<host>/<path>" is pretty much useless for anything except host=localhost: ``The file URL scheme is unusual in that it does not specify an Internet protocol or access method for such files; as such, its utility in network protocols between hosts is limited.'' So, FTP is *not* the "default protocol". On the other hand, if <host> actually begins with "ftp.", it's a pretty good guess that FTP will work. Similarly, if <host> actually begins with "www.", it's a pretty good guess that HTTP will work. This seems to me like a practicality-vs.-purity consideration. Bill _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
