I just realized that while this is a compatible change for $.ajax,
it's not for $.param. If encodeData isn't passed in, it'll stop
encoding by default. Gonna put some more thought into it. I'm open
to suggestions.
:Marco
On Nov 20, 5:22 pm, Marco Rogers <marco.rog...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is essentially a proposal for an enhancement to the two named
> functions:
>
> I ran into an issue today when sending parameters with the ajax
> function. If the data option is set, $.param is used to encode and
> format the keys and values into a query string. But some of the
> values in my data were already encoded and hence got double encoded.
> It was not easy to determine which params had been pre-encoded and
> which hadn't. And there's no way to tell $.ajax not to encode the
> data because it's already been done.
>
> I got around the issue by explicitly decoding all the params before
> passing to $.ajax to be re-encoded. This is obviously ugly and has
> the potential for other hidden issues.
>
> I don't know if this happens often enough to do something about it.
> But if so, I'm thinking it could be addressed in one of 2 ways. Sorry
> for using words instead of code, don't have much time.
>
> 1) Add an "encodeData" option to $.ajax and $.param that defaults to
> true. $.ajax would pass it through to $.param and If it's false,
> it'll skip the encoding step.
>
> $.ajax has plenty of options already and this one wouldn't be used
> often I'm sure. But it's trivial to add and backwards compatible.
>
> 2) Add an option to pass in a data processing function.
>
> It looks like $.param uses an inner "add" function that does the
> simple formatting and encoding. $.ajax could allow passing in a
> replacement for that function. It would take the current key and value
> being processed and skip encoding or add some special logic based on
> the key name.
>
> function newAdd(key, value) {
> return key + '=' + value;
> }
>
> The only problem with this is that the current add function doesn't
> return the formatted string. It accesses an array through a closure
> and adds the string explicitly. This could be refactored to use a
> binding or something, but it may not be trivial because the
> buildParams function also uses this closure to facilitate the
> recursion on array values.
>
> Any input is appreciated. If this seems worthwhile I may tackle it
> and submit a pull request.
>
> :Marco
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"jQuery Development" group.
To post to this group, send email to jquery-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
jquery-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-dev?hl=.
