Is the following URL valid?
http://www.example.com/module.php/lib/lib.php
According to http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1738 section the hpath element of an URL can not contain a '.' (period). There is in the above case a '.' after "module" which is not allowed according to RFC1738.
Am I reading the RFC wrong or is this RFC succeed by another RFC? Some other RFC's allows '.' in URLs (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1808).
I don't see where RFC1738 disallows periods (.) in URLs. Here are some excerpts from there:
hpath = hsegment *[ "/" hsegment ]
hsegment = *[ uchar | ";" | ":" | "@" | "&" | "=" ]
uchar = unreserved | escape
unreserved = alpha | digit | safe | extra
safe = "$" | "-" | "_" | "." | "+"
So the answer to your question is: Yes, http://www.example.com/module.php/lib/lib.php is a valid URL.
Periods are allowed. See section "2.3 Unreserved Characters" in this document: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986
"Characters that are allowed in a URI but do not have a reserved purpose are called unreserved. These include uppercase and lowercase letters, decimal digits, hyphen, period, underscore, and tilde".
Nothing wrong with a period in a url. If you look at the makeup in the grammar in the link you provided a period is mentioned via the 'safe' group, which is included via uchar a
Ignore my answer, Adams is better
来源：https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7555553/can-period-be-part-of-the-path-part-of-an-url