EWF/EWSGI.md

• See proposed specifications: EWSGI specification
• See Open questions
• And below the various proposals and associated decision

---

Waiting for decision

Include EWF_HEADER into EWSGI as WGI_HEADERS

• Code: P-2011-09-26-include-wgi-headers
• Status: proposed on 2011-09-26 WAITING FOR APPROVAL

Include WGI_HEADERS to help the user to build HTTP Header. So that he doesn't have to know the HTTP specification for usual needs

---

Adopted entries

Rename parameter into item

• Code: P-2011-09-07-renaming_REQUEST_item
• Status: proposed on 2011-09-07 ADOPTED-by-default

rename {REQUEST}.parameter (n: READABLE_STRING_GENERAL): detachable WGI_VALUE
into {REQUEST}.item (n: READABLE_STRING_GENERAL): detachable WGI_VALUE
and similar for parameters -> items

Return type of `parameter' (and similar query_, form_data_ ...) should be deferred WGI_VALUE

• Code: P-2011-09-05-WGI_VALUE
• Status: proposed on 2011-09-05 ADOPTED-by-default

Instead of returning just READABLE_STRING_32 , it would be better to use WGI_VALUE .
Mainly to address the multiple value for the same param name, but also for uploaded files.
This allows to have various types such as WGI_STRING_VALUE, WGI_LIST_VALUE, WGI_TABLE_VALUE, WGI_FILE_VALUE .

Thus we would have: parameter (a_name: READABLE_STRING_GENERAL): detachable WGI_VALUE

Include the parameter's name in WGI_VALUE interface

• Code: P-2011-09-05-WGI_VALUE_interface
• Dependence: adoption of P-2011-09-05-WGI_VALUE , may impact on P-2011-09-05-parameters_ITERABLE
• Status: proposed on 2011-09-05 ADOPTED-by-default

include the corresponding parameter's name in WGI_VALUE interface.
Such as {WGI_VALUE}.name: READABLE_STRING_GENERAL (or READABLE_STRING_32).

This would also allow to replace
signature parameters: ITERABLE [TUPLE [name: READABLE_STRING_GENERAL; value: WGI__VALUE]]' by a nicer signature parameters: ITERABLE [WGI__VALUE]`

Signature of parameters (and similar) using ITERABLE [...]

• Code: P-2011-09-05-parameters_ITERABLE
• Status: proposed on 2011-09-05 ADOPTED-by-default

Description: Instead of forcing the implementation to use HASH_TABLE, DS_HASH_TABLE, DS_HASH_SET, ... or similar we should use ITERABLE

parameters: ITERABLE [TUPLE [name: READABLE_STRING_GENERAL; value: WGI_VALUE]]

Or, if P-2011-09-05-WGI_VALUE_interface is adopted (WGI_VALUE.name holds the related parameter's name)

parameters: ITERABLE [WGI_VALUE]

Change prefix from EWSGI_ to WGI_

• Code: P-2011-08-29-WGI_prefix
• Status: adopted
• Decision: WGI_

shorter and pronouncable prefix for EWSGI class names

---

Rejected entries

...