Note: I'll use "POST" as in "every http request that can have a body"
Jeah, it's essentially https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55256. The current implementation treats the "Parameters" and "Post Body" as kind-of-the-same (as in "both is just request data"), which means the behaviour is entirely dependent on the verb you select. Eg. if you select "POST" as a verb, the "Parameters" get sent in the body like it works for basic html-forms, if you select "GET" they get sent as url-params. The "Post body" is just a way to prevent this auto-parsing in case of sending a POST which in turn is the same as having a single unnamed parameter and just putting the post-data in the value field (which is the way that we sent json requests before the "post body" was introduced ... though I am degressing). So if you want to do a POST-request that has not only a body but also a url-params (which I have come across at times already), you have to write them in the address field by hand instead of having a nice form. On 26 August 2013 21:59, Philippe Mouawad <[email protected]> wrote: > Changed it to Body Data. > > @Immanuel, Not sure I understand your question, could you illustrate with > examples ? > I saw the bugzilla you opened, is it related ? > Thanks > > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 9:04 AM, Immanuel Hayden > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> +1, I'd suggest "Message body" >> on a related note, is it only me who thinks it is weird that the >> parameter view is either url-params or post-body-values depending on >> what method you select? >> >> On 25 August 2013 23:21, Milamber <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > Le 25/08/2013 22:07, Philippe Mouawad a ecrit : >> > >> >> Hello, >> >> IN HTTP Request, I wonder if "Raw Post Body" field is still relevant as >> it >> >> can also be used for: >> >> - PUT >> >> - DELETE >> >> - PATCH >> >> >> >> Should we rename it Raw Body ? >> > >> > >> > Yes +1 >> > >> >> >> > >> > > > > -- > Cordialement. > Philippe Mouawad.
