commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Germuska <>
Subject Re: Fixes for
Date Tue, 23 Mar 2004 20:36:31 GMT
At 11:23 AM -0800 3/23/04, Earl Hood wrote:
>There is a change where some stricter formating is enforced.  For example,
>if a part does not define a content-disposition, and exception is thrown.
>There is a comment asking if this is desired.  It is not clear from
>looking at the code and conformant a post should be.  IMO, it should
>be, or, conformance should be configurable.  Malformed data can
>indicate application errors (and possible security issues), so quietly
>ignoring errors should probably be avoided.

I'd suggest that this be switchable, and default to not throwing an 
exception, for backwards compatibility reasons.  Also, you're 
ultimately relying on browser authors to implement the spec 
perfectly, and given the variability I've seen in things like 
assigning content-types, I think it's best to allow for browser 
variation in how dispositions are handled also.

Thanks (from another user) for providing a patch, though!

Joe Germuska       
       "Imagine if every Thursday your shoes exploded if you tied them 
the usual way.  This happens to us all the time with computers, and 
nobody thinks of complaining."
             -- Jef Raskin

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message