W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org > December 2008

On usefulness of p:www-form-urlencode

From: <Toman_Vojtech@emc.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2008 03:22:00 -0500
Message-ID: <6E216CCE0679B5489A61125D0EFEC7870DAFAEFA@CORPUSMX10A.corp.emc.com>
To: <public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org>

Hi all,

At its present form, p:www-form-urlencode step takes a set of parameters
from its parameter input port, URL encodes them (into a string in the
form "param1=value1&param2=value2&...") and then, similarly to
p:string-replace, replaces all matching nodes in the input document with
this string value.

I am wondering whether this is the best thing to do. In my opinion, in
most of the cases you want to inject full URLs (that is, something like:
"http://bla?param1=value2&...") in the document, not just encoded
parameters. As the spec stands now, you would need to use a sequence of
two p:string-replace like steps (p:www-form-urlencode +

- first, you encode and insert the parameters using
- then you find the inserted values and prepend the server part using

In my opinion, this is too inefficient and cumbersome (and possibly
unsafe in the second step as well).

Sorry that I bring up this issue again, but: what if
p:www-form-urlencode, p:uuid, p:hash just returned a simple c:result
document (containing the serialized parameters, or uuid, or hash)
instead of behaving as p:string-replace? In my opinion, this would give
us much more flexibility, because you could then do things like
assigning the content of c:result to a variable which you could then,
for instance, refer to in the "replacement" option in p:string-string
replace. It would also seem cleaner to me.

Received on Monday, 8 December 2008 08:22:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:28:26 UTC