- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 10:50:56 -0700
- To: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
- Cc: Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Alfonso Martínez de Lizarrondo <amla70@gmail.com>, Webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
2011/7/11 Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>:
> On 7/11/2011 10:12 AM, Adrian Bateman wrote:
>>
>> On 11 July 2011 10:02, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>>
>>> Additionally, what is the use case of being able to set the filename
>>> during a FormData submission? My perception was that the main use case
>>> was to not get an empty filename as many serverside implementations of
>>> multipart/form-data did not deal well with that. I so far have not
>>> heard a reason to believe that having the ability to specify a precise
>>> filename is a common use case, so it seems unnecessary to add syntax
>>> sugar for that.
>>
>> Some content management systems use the original filename by default when
>> storing files in document libraries. It's certainly a lesser use case but
>> seems like a relatively trivial change to the API. I don't see it as sugar,
>> since it's not possible to achieve this on the client in any other way.
>>
>> Adrian.
>
> The work around is a lot of work: using ArrayBuffer with XHR allows
> arbitrary POSTS,
> and so a multipart submissions can be built up from that.
>
> That's what we've had to do in the meantime.
The suggested workaround is:
var bb = new BlobBuilder;
bb.append(theblob);
myFormData.append("file", bb.getFile(name));
compared to
myFormData.append("file", theblob, name);
So no array buffers or manual encoding needed. Just two extra lines of
code, one of which can be reused every time you need to do this.
/ Jonas
Received on Monday, 11 July 2011 17:51:53 UTC