On 27.03.2016 19:36, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Koos Zevenhoven writes:
To be honest, I do think it feels like URL:s are becoming (or have become) just as important as paths, and that pathlib.Path should in the future work with URLs just like it now works with windows and posix paths.
... to the concept, but: Is there a semantic difference between a RFC 3986 path component (Section 3.3), and a pathlib path? If there is, this could be a difficult project. (May as well start now, though!)
I would interpret the path of pathlib as a subset of functionality of path of a URI.
""" The path component contains data, usually organized in hierarchical form [...] serves to identify a resource within the scope of the URI's scheme and naming authority (if any). """
URI's scheme for path of pathlib could implicitly be: "file://"
Relative paths of pathlib are a subset of relative references (Section 4.1).
The only practical issue, I can think of is, how to distinguish (in the sense of avoiding hidden bugs) file paths and url paths.
And name clashes when communicating with your fellow programmers: "I got that url path working" "the url path or the url path path?"