Wrong field names, misleading setup


  • When setting up a new account and choose “Login with URL and user name”, the first field is to enter a “Base URL”. Clearly, this field does NOT expect an URL. Instead, I suppose it expects the authority plus a path.

    When you enter the URL (as suggested by the field description), the setup will fail with no really useful error message. However, when you remove the scheme part from the supposed URL, everything works just as expected.

    Please do change the field description, better reflecting that NOT an URL is required in this field, but the authority plus path instead. Or just change the parser and make the field do what it says it does: accept URLs.

    Please also consider improving error messages for the initial setup to make them more verbose and display something more meaningful other than the semantical equivalent to “didn’t work”.

    Dumping hours or so in “errors” that could have been clearly avoided by proper use of terminology is NOT fun. 😞

  • developer

    @steffen Hi,

    No, an URL should work and works here. When no scheme is given, DAVx⁵ prepends https:// automatically because many people enter just a host name (and this should be possible for convenience).

    Please provide information about the specific URL you have tried.

    Please also consider improving error messages for the initial setup to make them more verbose and display something more meaningful other than the semantical equivalent to “didn’t work”.

    That sounds very good. Please provide information about the specific URL, the current message and what message you would expect.


  • @rfc2822 That’s curious. I’m unable to replicate the issue at this point in time. I get sensible error messages and it works with a “proper URL”.

    Yesterday (on a different device however), I wouldn’t get sensible error messages and in the end the only way to make it work was to omit the scheme. The password was in the clipboard all the time. Therefore I assumed this was another example of those cases where people say URL and mean something different (which unfortunately happens quite a lot).

    I stand corrected!

    I’m puzzeld, as I can’t think of anything that may have caused the issue (and that may have gone away omitting the scheme) in the first place. 🤔 Very mysterious!

    If I can ever replicate the issue, I would file a new report with instructions on replicating the issue.

Similar topics