RFC 2616 says that 'the "multipart/form-data" type has been specifically defined for carrying form data suitable for processing via the POST request method,' so I don't think there's an immediate need to support this content type for other request methods. I'd say we should cross this bridge when we come to it - or rather let those who need it build it... :)
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Hans Hübner <hans.hueb...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Edi, > > while file uploads only make sense with form data, I could see how one would > encounter an API that uses PUT with form data. I have not seen such an API > myself, but I see no reason not to support such APIs. Do you? > > -Hans > > Am 17.07.2013 10:42 schrieb "Edi Weitz" <e...@agharta.de>: > >> I'm also on vacation, so just a quick response: >> >> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 8:54 AM, Hans Hübner <hans.hueb...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > First off, it seems that DRAKMA restricts the use of file upload >> > parameters >> > to POST requests in the WHEN form that you pasted. I do not think that >> > is >> > the right thing, as the HTTP standard does not restrict the use of >> > request >> > bodies to specific methods. >> >> I think you're mixing up two things - request bodies and parameters. >> Drakma doesn't disallow request bodies - that's what CONTENT is for. >> But Drakma simply doesn't know what to do with file parameters if >> you're not sending a POST request as they only make sense with form >> data. >> >> I don't think the patch is useful. >> >> Peter, why are you not using :CONTENT? >> >> Cheers, >> Edi.
