On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 16:05 +0900, Kenichi Handa wrote:
> What I still don't know is what value url-request-data
> should have?
It would be ideal if url.el would add charset information to the
Content-Type MIME header. This way url.el can ensure that the
information it always correct and it saves
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Mark A. Hershberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
[...]
> I'm not using url-dav.el -- I'm using xml-rpc.el which I maintain.
> However, to eliminate the reliance on external code, I've pulled the bit
> from xml-rpc.el that makes the call to post to a weblog hosted
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Mark A. Hershberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
> Could I get input on the following patch before I apply it? The first
> part (using string-bytes instead of length) seems like a no-brainer.
> The second part, I'm less sure about.
If url-request-data is a strin
>> > - (length url-request-data))
>> > + (string-bytes url-request-data))
>>
>> I must say I haven't looked at the code, but it's anything but
>> a no-brainer. I'd rather say that it's obviously wrong. `string-bytes'
>> will give you the
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 15:47 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > - (length url-request-data))
> > + (string-bytes url-request-data))
>
> I must say I haven't looked at the code, but it's anything but
> a no-brainer. I'd rather say that it's
> Could I get input on the following patch before I apply it? The first
> part (using string-bytes instead of length) seems like a no-brainer.
> The second part, I'm less sure about.
> --- url-http.el 4 Jun 2005 18:37:16 - 1.14
> +++ url-http.el 10 Jun 2005 18:36:06 -
>
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 11:46 -0400, Mark A. Hershberger wrote:
> Could I get input on the following patch before I apply it? The first
> part (using string-bytes instead of length) seems like a no-brainer.
> The second part, I'm less sure about.
Full patch included this time.
And a fuller explana
