[jcifs] Character Set discussions

Christopher R. Hertel crh at ubiqx.mn.org
Sat Feb 8 08:38:57 EST 2003

On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 03:48:00PM -0500, Michael B. Allen wrote:
> Didn't we(I) conclude previously however that once we start accepting
> escapes we must also return them? 

I don't think you do need to return escapes if they are not required by 
the environment (and that's the sticky point).  For example, if you are 
given:  smb://f%6Fo/  there's no reason not to return that as: smb://foo/

> And if we return them then do we escape characters as we drill down
> doing list() operations? We just can't do that.

You escape characters for presentation only.  There's no reason to keep
the URLs in escaped format once they are parsed and stored in an internal
(parsed) format.

> We might as well just drop the URL status alltogether and call
> it URL-like.

I have no idea how you've arrived at that conclusion.  This is perfectly 
valid stuff and matches the behavior of other URI.

> Does the URI class remove and discard the escapes? I don't
> have Java 1.4 on my machines. Is there anyway to get the original escaped
> URL from you uri object above back? Like from toString()?

There should be.  Like a computer language, the point here is to translate 
between something human-readable and computer-usable.  In this case, we 
also need to go back again because new URL strings can be generated based 
on combinations (absolute + relative) of other strings.  The new URL 
strings are then presented back to the user in user-readable form.

That's what existing browsers, including those that handle SMB URLs, 
already do.  We're just talking about expanding it to include Unicode.

Chris -)-----

Samba Team -- http://www.samba.org/     -)-----   Christopher R. Hertel
jCIFS Team -- http://jcifs.samba.org/   -)-----   ubiqx development, uninq.
ubiqx Team -- http://www.ubiqx.org/     -)-----   crh at ubiqx.mn.org
OnLineBook -- http://ubiqx.org/cifs/    -)-----   crh at ubiqx.org

More information about the jcifs mailing list