W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2009

Re: Proposal for sending multiple files via XMLHttpRequest.send()

From: Michael Nordman <michaeln@google.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 13:35:52 -0700
Message-ID: <fa2eab050909141335u2b0d115atc9a78d7b5d178ede@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: Alfonso Martínez de Lizarrondo <amla70@gmail.com>, Jian Li <jianli@chromium.org>, Yaar Schnitman <yaar@chromium.org>, public-webapps@w3.org
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:

> 2009/9/14 Michael Nordman <michaeln@google.com>:
> > What I think we really want is a script-only means of sending multipart
> > form-data encoding POSTs that contain a mix of file- parts and
> binary-parts
> > (in addition to the ability to send the raw contents of a file).
> > * script-only, so these POSTs can be performed in workers
> > * multipart form-data, its the defacto standard
> > The Gears stab at this was BlobBuilder, which let developers compose
> > something with a mix of utf8 encoded strings and binary ile data, and
> > Gears.HttpRequest.send(blob). Developers were left to their own devices
> to
> > produce a valid mulitpart form-data encoded blob by manually stitching
> > together the parts with appropiate boundaries and such, and then setting
> the
> > content-type on the request properly prior to sending. Somewhat tedious
> for
> > developers but it worked.
> I definitely think that we need to add some way of sending a stream
> that is a concatenation of strings, binary data, and files, without
> requiring the files to be read.
> Once we have that, there's a question of if we need to add convenience
> features for specific formats, such as multipart form-data and/or

Agreed... and gears stopped at the first milestone you described without
adding the convenience classes.

> / Jonas
Received on Monday, 14 September 2009 20:36:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:18 UTC