On 30/08/11 10:12, Marek Potociar wrote:
>
>
> On 08/30/2011 10:32 AM, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>>
>> On 29/08/11 20:08, 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.
>>
>> I'd prefer to get a dedicated helper, but I'd also opt for a delegation as opposed to extension:
>> Form()
>> Form(MultivaluedMap)
>> MultivaluedMap getData()
>> Form set(String name, String value)
>>
>> this is how it'd done in CXF, but I personally like
>> post(new Form().set("name", value))
>
> I think it can be useful to expose Form as a multivalued map. But it's true that we should probably not extend any
> particular MultivaluedMap implementation. Would you be OK with such change?
a form provider can check if it's Form and if yes then do form.getData()
and proceed as usual, I've no strong preference re Form extending vs
Form using MultivaluedMap, well, have a minor preference for the latter,
but I'm easy on this one
Sergey
>
> Marek
>
>>
>> Sergey