You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Both httpRequestTests and httpResponseTests have a bodyMediaType field. This field allows test generators, among other things, to know how the body field is encoded.
Because the body parameter is a string, binary data MUST be represented in body by base64 encoding the data (for example, use "Zm9vCg==" and not "foo")
However, HttpMalformedRequestDefinition does not have a bodyMediaType field. So far in smithy-rs we have sent these malformed requests by sending the body contents as-is, and this has worked well because all protocols that Smithy currently supports use text-based serialization formats. However, with the advent of Smithy RPC v2 CBOR, this is no longer case, and so we need a way to tell the test generator whether to base64-decode body or not before sending the request: the bodyMediaType field would fulfill this need.
Can we add bodyMediaType to HttpMalformedRequestDefinition?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Both
httpRequestTests
andhttpResponseTests
have abodyMediaType
field. This field allows test generators, among other things, to know how thebody
field is encoded.However,
HttpMalformedRequestDefinition
does not have abodyMediaType
field. So far in smithy-rs we have sent these malformed requests by sending the body contents as-is, and this has worked well because all protocols that Smithy currently supports use text-based serialization formats. However, with the advent of Smithy RPC v2 CBOR, this is no longer case, and so we need a way to tell the test generator whether to base64-decodebody
or not before sending the request: thebodyMediaType
field would fulfill this need.Can we add
bodyMediaType
toHttpMalformedRequestDefinition
?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: