-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Colin Mollenhour wrote:
> Did anyone read my first post to this thread? I make some very good 
> points there but they seem to have been completely ignored thus far.
IMHO, folks didn't ignore your previous mail, they merely assumed you
already reviewed the discussion in this thread and "fixed" your *wrong*
assumption that:

> Is 2 not incorrect? That should be "foo[]=a&foo[]=b" if I'm not 
> mistaken... On the server side you will get foo=b.

Mislav said it multiple times right in this thread: *do not assume* a
*specific* backend.

> Yes, as I stated in my previous post as well, this *definitely* need to
> be changed to follow the array name with brackets, otherwise you are
> simply redefining that variable over and over again and it will simply
> equal the last value. Maybe rails handles this correctly but probably
> nothing else will and it simply isn't correct.

And now you stepped from "if I'm not mistaken" to "*definitely*"? Even more,
you assume "nothing else" *is* PHP. :(

> The correct result of the above toQueryString should be: 
> "blah[]=foo&blah[]=bar" Which will yield: [blah] => Array ( [0] => foo 
> [1] => bar )

Search the old spinoffs archive and the Trac for toQueryString and/or
toQueryParams. There were (way too) many discussions about these issues.
Everybody assumes whatever they wanna hear, biased by their favorite web
platform way of "understanding the universe" :(
e.g.: http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/6645

I agree, all these discussions have their reason, even if we were to think
just about how scarcely/scattered is this application/x-www-form-urlencoded
based form submission procedure documented throughout the specs (RFC2396,
RFC1867, RFC2616, RFC3875, W3/HTML4.01Specs/Forms) :(

Ah, but no, we are NOT discussing about serializing HTML forms, we're just
trying to make up a wannabe abstract serialization engine which tries to
mimic application/x-www-form-urlencoded's encoding. :(

As a matter of fact, the only real reason I stepped into a discussion on
this issue is that toQuery(Params|String) are being used for XHR parameters
serialization and HTML forms serialization. Otherwise, I'd have *nothing* to
complain about *any* funky convention you may choose for this weird (YMMV)
serialization system. :(

Yes, *convention* IS the key point - e.g. remember the discussions about
"undefined" vs "" vs "false" vs "null" ? ;-/

My apologies again, in advance, if I may offended someone with my kinda
personal opinions on the matter.

yours, weeping,
- --
Marius Feraru
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iD8DBQFF+VaUtZHp/AYZiNkRAqFiAKCORr1NRhIEv1FPDIEH2wbVPTSp7ACgsfF5
XN3W4yyGTZX6f8FFSEKBDQs=
=/WRP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to