Validate URL

[yamanq]

Describe the bug Several bridges have a url input field. When a user inputs invalid contents (e.g. #2728 Context 3), this results in an error.

To Reproduce Steps to reproduce the behavior:

1. Enter ://www.mydealz.de/diskussion/title-123 into the third context of MydealsBridge

Expected behavior Observe well-formatted returnServerError. In addition to handling the exceptions, bridges like MydealsBridge should validate inputs (e.g. XenForoBridge).

Observed behavior

• Using latest master: bb6d553d

Additional context This problem still existed before #2692, though the Exception had a more complete message:

Could not get contents
cURL error:  (3)

[dvikan]

This particular problem with mydealsbridge is because there is an exception in the exception handling. I'm observing Protocol "" not supported or disabled in libcurl (1).

This issue touches on a lot of things at the same time. Since we don't have a url type for bridge forms, we must manually validate the input in each bridge.

[yamanq]

Yes, I guess there are 2 issues here:

• Feature Request: url type for bridge parameters that validates the input
• Bug: Exceptions should show returnServerError dialog

[dvikan]

We have a low amount of url inputs so I suggest we don't introduce a new type. Manual validation in each bridge is fine.

What exactly is a returnServerError dialog? I think you mean better UX? Or maybe you mean that this error too shows up as an item in a feed?

[yamanq]

A quick search shows about 20 bridges use url. I think we have url validation somewhere in core anyways so why would you be against making that available to bridges?

Yes, just better UX

[dvikan]

It's a tradeoff. I prefer less code and simpler code. Not much value to be gained. I also think it takes an hour to implement correctly. Feel free to make a PR.

[yamanq]

Wouldn't this equate to more code as each bridge implements the same validation?

[dvikan]

Less code in the core.