Updated EWSGI Open Questions (markdown)
This commit is contained in:
@@ -6,19 +6,20 @@ And then for Berend, STRING_32 is not the solution.
|
||||
Most of the data are just STRING_8 in CGI
|
||||
so let's list the various request data
|
||||
|
||||
- **parameters** (from the query string ?foo=bar&extra=blabla )
|
||||
- **query_parameter** (from the query string ?foo=bar&extra=blabla )
|
||||
in this case, I think the name can be url-encoded, and obviously the value too
|
||||
I guess it makes sense to url-decode them
|
||||
but on the other hand, we could just keep them url-encoded (as they are), and it is up to the application to url-decode them if needed.
|
||||
Of course, we should provide facilities to url-decode those strings.
|
||||
|
||||
- **form_fields** (from the POST method)
|
||||
- **form_data_parameter** (from the POST method)
|
||||
quite often, it is same kind of content that `parameters'
|
||||
but .. here this might depends on the encoding for multi-parts encoding.
|
||||
|
||||
- **meta_variable** (from the request itself ... CGI meta variables..)
|
||||
I am wondering about unicode domain name ...
|
||||
|
||||
- **input data** ...
|
||||
I think this is up to the application
|
||||
|
||||
note: that form fields sent by GET method, will be in `parameters' ... so maybe we should rename the "form_fields" as "post_parameters". Anyway not critical for now
|
||||
|
||||
... to be continued ...
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user