Request for clarification: URL parsing behavior in Requests (RFC 3986 vs WHATWG)

Aperta
  • Qualcosa non va?
#7,141 2 commenti 2 reazioni 0 assegnatari Vedi su GitHub

@cici-czx ci sta già lavorando.

Dal 7/1/2026.

  • #7307 di @nuglifeleoji — chiusa senza merge

Valutazione

Difficoltà
4/5
Tempo stimato
3-5 giorni
Idoneità per principianti
25/100
Tipo di issue
Documentazione
Chiarezza
Da chiarire
Stato di attività
Ferma
Stack tecnologico
python
Ambito
backend

Direzione di ricerca

Inizia esaminando l’issue citata #5886 e confrontando il comportamento osservato con i riferimenti RFC 3986, RFC 7230 e WHATWG URL collegati qui. Non sono identificati file sorgente né test; l’issue è conclusa quando i maintainer chiariranno quale specifica o comportamento di compatibilità Requests segue intenzionalmente.

Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.

Descrizione

Hello Requests maintainers,

Thank you for maintaining Requests and for the extensive discussions around URL parsing behavior over the years.

I am seeking clarification regarding which specification(s) Requests follows for URL parsing, particularly for HTTP(S) URLs, as I have observed behaviors that appear to align with different standards.

In previous discussions, Requests developers have noted that the library primarily follows RFC-based specifications. For example, in https://github.com/psf/requests/issues/5886, it is stated that:

RFC 3986 is the standard that Requests and urllib3 primarily use as a reference for their URL parsers.

This suggests that Requests' URL parsing logic is grounded in RFC 3986, with HTTP semantics further informed by RFC 7230.

However, I have observed a behavior in Requests that seems closer to the WHATWG URL Standard.

Specifically, when parsing HTTP URLs whose hostname contains a backslash (), Requests appears to treat \ as a delimiter equivalent to /, effectively separating the authority from the path.
This behavior is consistent with the WHATWG URL Standard's definition of the authority parsing state (see: https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#authority-state).

Image

By contrast: RFC 3986 treats \ as a disallowed character in URLs and does not define it as a structural delimiter. Many RFC-oriented parsers (e.g., urllib.parse.urlparse) either reject such URLs or treat \ as an ordinary character, rather than as a path/authority separator.

Image
Question

Could you please clarify:

Whether Requests intentionally references or aligns with the WHATWG URL Standard for any part of its URL parsing behavior (especially hostname handling)?

Or whether the observed behavior is still considered RFC 3986–based, but with pragmatic extensions or legacy compatibility considerations?

Understanding this would be very helpful for accurately characterizing Requests' parsing semantics and for reasoning about cross-component URL parsing consistency.

Thank you very much for your time and clarification.

Lingua principale
Python
Stelle
54.7k
Fork
10.8k
Merge medio
18m
PR unite (30g)
1

Preparare l'ambiente

Come iniziare

  1. Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
  2. Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
  3. Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
  4. Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.

Altre issue di psf/requests

Tutte le issue di psf/requests

Issue simili

Altre issue su Python

Ricevi le nuove issue nella tua casella

Un breve riepilogo di issue GitHub adatte ai principianti.