You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@jmeter.apache.org by sebb <se...@gmail.com> on 2012/08/23 12:46:20 UTC
Possible changes to HTTP GUI
There is currently a field called "Content encoding".
This does not relate to the Content-Encoding header, but is the
encoding for the content.
It would probably be clearer if the field was renamed "Charset". Agreed?
Also, PUT and PATCH methods require the Content-Type to be specified.
At present this has to be done via a Header Manager or via the MIME
type if a file body is used.
Perhaps we should add "Content-Type" to the GUI, e.g after "Charset"
(if renamed) ?
The "Post Body" tab actually applies to PUT and PATCH as well, so
should be renamed.
Perhaps "Content Body" ?
Re: Possible changes to HTTP GUI
Posted by Milamber <mi...@apache.org>.
Le 23/08/2012 11:46, sebb a ecrit :
> There is currently a field called "Content encoding".
>
> This does not relate to the Content-Encoding header, but is the
> encoding for the content.
>
> It would probably be clearer if the field was renamed "Charset". Agreed?
Yes.
>
> Also, PUT and PATCH methods require the Content-Type to be specified.
> At present this has to be done via a Header Manager or via the MIME
> type if a file body is used.
>
> Perhaps we should add "Content-Type" to the GUI, e.g after "Charset"
> (if renamed) ?
Yes. Perhaps put the new label and field at the end of field Path to
preserve the global window length?
example: Path [_______________] Content-Type: [_____] (small length)
>
> The "Post Body" tab actually applies to PUT and PATCH as well, so
> should be renamed.
> Perhaps "Content Body" ?
"Raw Body" or "Raw Parameters"?
And perhaps change "Parameters" to "Parsed parameters"
(in WebScarab (a tool to help in pentest), the tabs are "Parsed" and "Raw")
Milamber
Re: Possible changes to HTTP GUI
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 23 August 2012 15:56, Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi sebb,
> Why would you not specify content type in a separate http header config
> element? How the content type defers from other headers?
The code already supports the use of the MIME type.
And it's slightly more awkward to use a separate config element.
Also, for POST requests it may need to be overridden.
Given that there is the MIME type processing already, I think we don't
actually need another GUI field.
So I think the behaviour for PUT/PATCH should be:
If MIME type is specified, use that, otherwise default to whatever
header has been provided.
This allows a local override of any header config, and allows the
header config to be omitted for PUT/PATCH.
POST is a bit different as it supports multipart and form-encoded content-type.
> Shmuel.
> בתאריך 2012 8 23 15:49, מאת "sebb" <se...@gmail.com>:
>
>> On 23 August 2012 11:46, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > There is currently a field called "Content encoding".
>> >
>> > This does not relate to the Content-Encoding header, but is the
>> > encoding for the content.
>> >
>> > It would probably be clearer if the field was renamed "Charset". Agreed?
>> >
>> > Also, PUT and PATCH methods require the Content-Type to be specified.
>> > At present this has to be done via a Header Manager or via the MIME
>> > type if a file body is used.
>> >
>> > Perhaps we should add "Content-Type" to the GUI, e.g after "Charset"
>> > (if renamed) ?
>>
>> Actually, I've just discovered that the MIME type can be used for this.
>>
>> > The "Post Body" tab actually applies to PUT and PATCH as well, so
>> > should be renamed.
>> > Perhaps "Content Body" ?
>>
Re: Possible changes to HTTP GUI
Posted by Shmuel Krakower <sh...@gmail.com>.
Hi sebb,
Why would you not specify content type in a separate http header config
element? How the content type defers from other headers?
Shmuel.
בתאריך 2012 8 23 15:49, מאת "sebb" <se...@gmail.com>:
> On 23 August 2012 11:46, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > There is currently a field called "Content encoding".
> >
> > This does not relate to the Content-Encoding header, but is the
> > encoding for the content.
> >
> > It would probably be clearer if the field was renamed "Charset". Agreed?
> >
> > Also, PUT and PATCH methods require the Content-Type to be specified.
> > At present this has to be done via a Header Manager or via the MIME
> > type if a file body is used.
> >
> > Perhaps we should add "Content-Type" to the GUI, e.g after "Charset"
> > (if renamed) ?
>
> Actually, I've just discovered that the MIME type can be used for this.
>
> > The "Post Body" tab actually applies to PUT and PATCH as well, so
> > should be renamed.
> > Perhaps "Content Body" ?
>
Re: Possible changes to HTTP GUI
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 23 August 2012 11:46, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There is currently a field called "Content encoding".
>
> This does not relate to the Content-Encoding header, but is the
> encoding for the content.
>
> It would probably be clearer if the field was renamed "Charset". Agreed?
>
> Also, PUT and PATCH methods require the Content-Type to be specified.
> At present this has to be done via a Header Manager or via the MIME
> type if a file body is used.
>
> Perhaps we should add "Content-Type" to the GUI, e.g after "Charset"
> (if renamed) ?
Actually, I've just discovered that the MIME type can be used for this.
> The "Post Body" tab actually applies to PUT and PATCH as well, so
> should be renamed.
> Perhaps "Content Body" ?