Re: URL syntax (was: Re: Tramp, "[]" in file names, and file-expand-wildcards)

[Stefan Monnier]

>  > I don't think we would _have_ to escape non-url characters if we are
>  > dealing with something written by the user.  We would have to have some
>  > code to sanitize them before sending them to the various protocol loaders
>  > though.
> 
> I think there are a number of problems, including (presumably)
> chucking the current behaviour of `//' and `/~', at least.

Indeed, the file-name-handler has to handle substitue-in-file-name
specially.  It currently handles the '//' and '/~' problem correctly.
But it should also allow to turn "/foo/http://blabla"; into "http://blabla";
or maybe even "http://foobar//home/bar"; to "/home/bar".

But I don't think that the current way substitute-in-file-name
checks for file-name-handlers is enough since the url file-name-handler
will simply not be called on file names like "/foo/http://blabla";.

The substitute-in-file-name command has special support to recognize
"/foo/a:/bar" under W32 and MS-DOS, but we need to make it more generic.


        Stefan