W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > June 2010

Re: [File API] Recent Updates To Specification + Co-Editor

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 17:35:35 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTinSThqB9gyVmS2yc4tnQqDJJt_mwgRtWrzOkulx@mail.gmail.com>
To: arun@mozilla.com
Cc: Alexey Proskuryakov <ap@webkit.org>, Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Eric Uhrhane <ericu@google.com>, Web Applications Working Group WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, public-device-apis <public-device-apis@w3.org>
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 4:01 PM, Arun Ranganathan <arun@mozilla.com> wrote:
> On 6/28/10 3:41 PM, Alexey Proskuryakov wrote:
>>
>> 28.06.2010, в 15:37, Adam Barth написал(а):
>>
>>> I believe Alexey Proskuryakov has strong feelings on this topic.
>>
>>
>> I e-mailed public-webapps not long ago, but that seems to have gone
>> unnoticed,
>> <http://www.mail-archive.com/public-webapps@w3.org/msg09236.html>.
>
> Alexey: sorry if I overlooked responding to your original note.  FWIW, we
> should separate URL/url and FileReader/BlobReader, since they are separate
> discussions.
>
> 1. URL vs. url: I agree that consistency is desirable, but almost *all*
> attributes *except constants* are expressed as lower case.  URL/url is an
> exception (I'm very happy we gave up the *far* more confusing URN/urn -- I'm
> sorry I even considered it ;-)).  I don't have a very strong opinion, so
> I'll defer to those that do, but to your point, Firefox also does ship
> 'document.URL' which seems likely the most common use of this property
> amongst authors.  We don't *also* ship 'document.url.'  My recollection is
> that Hixie changed a few things a while ago already, but I can't find a
> reference in email.  This is bikeshedding to a certain extent, since
> developers will defer to documentation about attribute names.  Given that a
> change has *already* occurred, do you *really* feel strongly enough to
> protest the change?

Right, this is completely orthogonal to the FileReader/BlobReader naming issue.

> 2. FileReader/BlobReader: I have a stronger opinion on this subject.  Blob
> hasn't really "landed" on the web in a big way yet.  Firefox's
> implementation doesn't do Blob, although we do File.  While renaming the
> object BlobReader does account for the fact that all the arguments to the
> read methods are Blob arguments, there hasn't been too much discussion of
> what the "majority use case" will be.  By "majority use case" I mean, what
> the object will be *mostly* used for.  *Right now* Jonas points out that the
> majority use case is with Files.  A good reason to rename it is if use cases
> emerge that are so compelling that manipulating Blob data generally might be
> just as desirable as manipulating user-selected files from the underlying
> file system.  Can you or anyone cite such use cases?
>
> In either case, we're agitating on behalf of web developers.  Having some
> weigh in would be useful in an implementor's bike-shedathon :-)

Would definitely like to hear developer feedback.

/ Jonas
Received on Tuesday, 29 June 2010 00:36:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:14:10 GMT