Hi, Am Mi, den 13.10.2004 schrieb Alan Milligan um 3:31: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Tino Wildenhain wrote: > > |> > |>I had a client that used to work on 2.7.0, and now doesn't on 2.7.3. > |> > |>The problem would appear to be that it's not substituting the > |>xmlrpc.Response class for a GET request on a text/xml content type and > |>therefore just delegating to the str() function instead of wrapping it > |>in the xml-rpc xml response tags. > |> > > | I wonder how this ever was supposed to work since > | XML-RPC requires an entidy body for the message (which is > | in XML). You can compare with RFC2616 - there is no > | entidy body in GET. Your client needs to use POST. > | I suspect then it should work. > | > > Ok, I now more fully understand the subtlety of this explanation. > > What happened here is that in cgi.py's FieldStorage class, since this is > a GET request, it completely ignores the CONTENT_TYPE environment and > sets the content-type header to x-www-form-urlencoded. > > According to Dave Winer's spec at http://www.xmlrpc.com/spec, XML-RPC is > supposed to be HTTP-POST based, where this issue is fully resolved. > > I have implemented this GET 'Extension' with this patch. > > I appreciate that supporting 'unofficial' extensions to protocols is not > something we want to encourage, but is there any chance of getting this > patch into zope core (ever)?
-1 by me. Go and fix the broken client instead. I wonder who came to such a crazy idea to even think about sending a body with GET. Regards Tino _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )