On 8/24/2011 1:33 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 20:44:15 +0200, Charles Pritchard
<ch...@jumis.com> wrote:
Is there any interest in supporting application/x-www-form-urlencoded ?
It would of course lose any carried content types or file names from
Blobs. urlencoding is certainly inefficient, and it's something that
can be done in JS as things currently stand.
It would help to send urlencoded posts to services that don't support
multipart.
Examples of such services would be useful here. (That would still
accept urlencoded files.)
A URL encoded post; that it would use a blob as the source of one of the
values is secondary.
The idea is to improve the FormData interface, so that
xhr.send(FormData) can support x-www-form-urlencoded quickly/easily.
Prpoposed:
FormData output with the x-www-form-urlencoded mime type:
formData.toUrlEncodedBlob(xhr.send)
If going down the blob path, these two would have the same end-result:
formData.toMultipartBlob(xhr.send)
xhr.send(formData);
What kind of API-style is this?
[Supplemental] FormData
void toMultipartBlob(in callback)
void toUrlEncodedBlob(in callback)
The first would create a multipart mime message, in a blob, and run the
callback with the blob as the first argument,
the second would create a urlencoded message, in a blob, and also run
the callback.
They'd set the appropriate content type on generated blob.
-Charles
