On 8/29/11 3:08 PM, Marek Potociar wrote:
> There is a javax.ws.rs.core.Form proposed to be introduced as part of JAX-RS 2.0 API as a general-purpose support for
> form-encoded data. It's been there since HttpRequest/Response were introduced early in June. I just stripped it off the
> annotation-support methods so right now it's (again) merely a typed extension of MultivaluedHashMap<String, String>
> without any added value. It's perhaps questionable if we need the class, but I'd prefer we brainstorm for potential
> value-add methods the class could host before we decide to drop it. We can drop it, if we can't find a good reason for
> keeping the class in the API.
>
> In any case, whether we decide to keep the Form or if we opt for going with a generic MultvaluedMap<String, String> as a
> representation of form-encoded parameters, I can see few options we should consider:
>
> 1. Provide a static Entity method:
> Entity.form(Form formData) or Entity.form(MultivaluedMap<String, String> formData)
>
> 2. Introduce public Entity Form.asEntity(); method. This one would require we move Entity into core package to avoid the
> dependency from core to client.
>
> 3. Provide another post() overload:
> SyncInvoker.post(Form formData); ...I wouldn't agree with the generic Map-based version in this case
>
The 3 above options break the "flow" of the invocation as you'd have to
create the message body outside the request block, i.e.:
Form form = new Form();
form.add("foo", "bar");
target.request().post(Entity.form(myForm));
I would prefer something like:
target.request().formParam("foo", "bar").post(); // Which of course
will further complicate the interface design
or
target.request().post(Entity.formParam("foo", "bar").formParam("bar",
"foo"));
or
target.request().post(Entity.form().param("foo, "bar").param("bar", "foo"));
or
target.request().post(Form.param("foo, "bar"),
Form.param("bar", "foo));
--
Bill Burke
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
http://bill.burkecentral.com