Resurrecting this thread. Would adding support for tel: uris be welcomed? And should we use net/url to do so?
On Friday, June 7, 2013 at 2:30:42 PM UTC-7, Alvaro J. Genial wrote: > > Thanks for the explanation. > > On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Mike Samuel <mikes...@gmail.com > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> I was being conservative in white-listing protocols. >> > > Seems like the right approach. > > >> I'm not that familiar with tel: URLs. What makes one valid & safe? >> > > Being only somewhat familiar with these kinds of URIs, I defer to the RFCs > on validity: > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2806#section-2.2 > > And security: > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5341#section-5 > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2806#section-5 > > If you're open to whitelisting (possibly some subset of) these URIs, I can > look into it in more detail, but I wanted to sanity check the idea first. > What do you think? In that vein, perhaps the template package should defer > to net/url for parsing rather than reinvent the wheel in > html/template/url.go. > > Alvaro > > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
