Addressable spring clean

[iainbeeston]

This tidies up a couple of (very?) minor things that came in with #174, that have caught my eye recently.

@RST-J I'd love to get your feedback on this, especially

[RST-J]

In general this should be fine. When I introduced addressable I did not look for such things especially and looking at it, I don't see a reason to parse the URI twice.
But, you should have a look at whether join or merge is the right action here (+ is an alias of join in addressable).
I think I used merge when introducing addressable where before join was used with URI. And if I remember correctly I came up with this because otherwise some tests failed.

[iainbeeston]

Thanks, that's a good tip - I'll check the addressable docs and look at how we're using it across the codebase=

[pd]

👍

[iainbeeston]

@RST-J I've had a look and I agree - it looks like merge(path: ...) would be better than join here (and also in Validator#absolutize_ref_uri) but I also found that tests fail when I tried doing that. I assume we're adding fragment or query elements to the path too.

So for now, I've changed + to join (it's more explicit and more in-keeping with everywhere else that we use Addressable::URI).

Otherwise I think I'm finished with this PR.

[RST-J]

Ok, then this should be handled in an issue/PR on its own.
👍