openapi3filter: support primitive parsing for individual text like parts in multipart/form-data #1090
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
added 2 commits
August 17, 2025 14:43
fenollp
changed the title
|
Thanks! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
All parts of a multipart/form-data request that are decoded using the PlainBodyDecoder (which is the default for omitted or text/plain parts) are considered to be of type string without these parts being parsed according to their specified schema.
This has been amended and tested in this PR.
This implementation relies on the fact that either an omitted or specified text/plain Content-Type part header will result in a string typed value.
Only parsing of primitive values is supported, as there seems no specifications available for array of object typed parts, as is the case for the different types of supported parameters according to OpenAPI. If this were to change, it should be relatively straightforward to amend the code to make use of an additional implementation of the valueDecoder interface specifically for this purpose.