W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > May 2009

Re: Overlap between WebApps and Device APIs WG on file operations

From: Arun Ranganathan <arun@mozilla.com>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 16:09:51 -0700
Message-ID: <4A0DF63F.6050905@mozilla.com>
To: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
CC: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>, Marcin Hanclik <Marcin.Hanclik@access-company.com>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, public-device-apis <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote:
> Le jeudi 14 mai 2009 à 00:07 +0200, Robin Berjon a écrit :
>   
>> I'm pretty sure that the two groups can work together on this. We  
>> probably don't even need a TF for it. As far as the charter is  
>> concerned I'd put something along the lines of "collaborating to make  
>> sure the file-related APIs are synchronised" — I think it ought to be  
>> enough.
>>     
>
> The charter now has "FileSystem API [...] this API should be developed
> in coordination with the Web Applications Working Group File Upload
> specification".
>
> Dom
>
> http://www.w3.org/2009/05/DeviceAPICharter.html#deliverables
>
>   
I'm going to continue to edit the specification as part of WebApps.  
Assuming the BONDI specification is informed by the Opera proposal, and 
that the BONDI specification will somehow make its way into W3C, I've 
read through:

http://bondi.omtp.org/IDLS/filesystem.html and

http://bondi.omtp.org/apis-current/classorg_1_1omtp_1_1bondi_1_1filesystem_1_1_file.html

I think some overlap is likely to occur.  The latter defines a "File" 
class, for instance, and seems to include some synchronous I/O behaviors.

Currently, I'm uncertain as to how I can inform myself by proposals by 
OMTP, but hope to produce a draft that may serve to make these 
discussions clearer.

-- A*
Received on Friday, 15 May 2009 23:10:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:13:59 GMT