On 08/30/2011 11:18 AM, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
> 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
On a second thought, I cannot find a good reason that would justify Form implementing a multivalued map directly. Can
you please file a new JIRA issue that Form should wrap but not extend MultivaluedMap and assign it to me?
Thanks,
Marek
>
> Sergey
>
>>
>> Marek
>>
>>>
>>> Sergey