TAPService run_async() fails when the result URI is relative

[streeto]

I am using CEFCA TAP services (currently only with authenticated access), and tried to make some async queries. I get this error:

MissingSchema: Invalid URL './21530/./results/result': No schema supplied. Perhaps you meant http://./21530/./results/result?

The job summary is like the following:

<uws:job xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.ivoa.net/xml/UWS/UWS-v1.0.xsd"
xmlns:xml = "http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace"
xmlns:uws="http://www.ivoa.net/xml/UWS/v1.0"
xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">

<uws:jobId>21529</uws:jobId>
<uws:ownerId>andre</uws:ownerId>
<uws:phase>PENDING</uws:phase>
<uws:quote>1</uws:quote>
<uws:startTime></uws:startTime>
<uws:endTime></uws:endTime>
<uws:executionDuration></uws:executionDuration>
<uws:destruction>2019-11-04 18:38:31.409070</uws:destruction>
<uws:parameters>
<uws:parameter id="QUERY">select * from minijpas.filter</uws:parameter>
<uws:parameter id="MAXREC">1000000</uws:parameter>
<uws:parameter id="FORMAT">votable</uws:parameter>
<uws:parameter id="LANG">ADQL</uws:parameter>
</uws:parameters>
<uws:results>
<uws:result id="main" xlink:href="./21529/./results/result"/>
</uws:results>
<uws:jobInfo>
</uws:jobInfo>
</uws:job>

After some tests, I made a hotfix to prepend the request URL (AsyncTAPJob.url) to the result URL if the job URL is not absolute, and it worked. I am not sure wether the spec requires an absolute URL or allows a relative one. I can make a pull request if this solution is correct.

I also tested with Topcat, works out of the box.

For reference, I am using the method for authentication described in examples/auth/gaia_auth_example.py.

[cbanek]

Hi there @streeto , thank you so much for filing an issue.

I just gave a quick look through the UWS spec, and I don't see a lot of info one way or the other on if it should be an absolute URL or could also be relative. It seems that if TOPCAT works, that it might be part of the spec, although again, I'm not sure.

Since you've already done the work of making a fix (and tested it), I would suggest that you make a PR, so we can at least see what is going on in the code - it seems like a pretty small targeted fix, but I just want to confirm that.

I'll try to ask around to see if there's any strong opinions on the UWS spec, I'll email Mark Taylor and the GWS list to see if anyone chimes in.