[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [camp] Issue 3: proposal direction with two choices
Hi Anish- Glad you updated CAMP-3 with this link. Somehow I missed it first time round! Obviously it raises a question about my draft proposal for CAMP-65... Q: What are the benefits of "pdpUri: cid:XXX" multi-part versus my suggestion of a single part and is it worth the overhead? * To attempt an answer I think it makes it easier for _javascript_ to upload as it won't have to build ZIPs on the fly. That's pretty compelling. But _requiring_ multipart from the client can also be tedious so my vote would be to require a platform to support EITHER a single part post which is interpreted as I described, or a multipart post where the first part is either the map containing { pdpUri: cid:XXX }, in YAML format (so allowing JSON), or possibly the pdp itself. (I think I prefer the latter unless there is a good reason for the former?) Having the deployment plan also support cid: is nice as then artifacts could be part of the same multi-part. * = also have we settled on how we treat abbreviations in camel case? i prefer pdpUri to pdpURI (otherwise you risk getting HTTPRESTAPI !) You also raised ... Q: multipart/form-data vs multipart/related I'm not sure. Will have to investigate, but not now as I'll miss my flight! :O You've probably chosen the right answer already of course. Best Alex On 01/05/2013 01:49, Anish Karmarkar wrote:
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]