Re: Resumable Uploads

[Felix Geisendörfer <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Julian Reschke <[e-mail]>wrote:

> But you *can* send multipart body from Javascript, right?
>

Yes. It's an option, but I think multipart would add a lot of complexity if
all we need is a way to indicate an offset argument.

On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]> wrote:

> >  XHR2 send interface
> Well, that probably should be fiaxed to allow an array of things, and not
> a single thing, where the things are then concatenated on the wire.
>

I agree. But that will take time.


> But until then:
> Put the offset:
>
> -- in the URI:
>    PATCH /foo?at=0020 HTTP/1.1
> -- in the Content-Type:
>    Content-Type: application/byteslice; at=0020
>

Thanks for the suggestions. The querystring might be the best option for
something the web can use today.

That being said, I'd still like to see http provide built-in primitives for
resume operations in the future and make sure whatever userland protocol we
end up defining has these upcoming mechanisms in mind / includes a clear
upgrade path.

So if my concerns for portability were lifted, it seems that defining a
PATCH format would be the best solution? Would this list still be the right
place for carrying on this discussion, or would this be a separate RFC?

Cheers,
--
Felix Geisendörfer (felixge.de)
Co-Founder, Transloadit (transloadit.com)