Hi! > I don't quite agree with this - this may be the common case for HTTP, > but the URI spec does not enforce it. Ok, but how should we differentiate between these both use-cases?
If we would like to allow this style of URL we need some special delimiter to know what to pass to VFS as configuration and what to pass further to the server. And no - I don't want to care if we are using the HTTP or any other scheme. Hmmm ..... what we can do might be something like this. We add a new resolveFile method to the FileSystemManager interface: FileObject resolveFileWithUrlConfiguration(String uri) and we separate the VFS configuration using the double question-mark (??) A url like: http://www/path/cgi-bin/send.pl?FILE=ABC&TYPE=PDF??proxyHost=proxy.host&proxyPort=8080 will work then. resolveFileWithUrlConfiguration will strip the part after (including) ?? and create the FileSystemOption stuff (if possible) which means the vfs configuration string will not be shown in the filename. Then FileObject fo = manager.resolveFileWithUrlConfiguration(....); FileObject fo2 = manager.resolveFileWithUrlConfiguration(fo.getName().toString); will not use the same filesystem configuration. This limitation makes it look a little bit hacky - we might remove this limitation later. What do you think? Ciao, Mario --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
