Re: [streams] Rename ReadableByteStream (#405)

> (That is, if we keep this as a distinct type. When will we decide on that?)

My thinking on this is that the question will become more urgent as implementer work spins up. Right now Chrome at least is working on fetch-with-streams uploads and author-constructible ReadableStream types, deprioritizing byte stream work, since those are more basic scenarios demanded by customers. Any input from other implementers that they are particularly interested in starting work on the byte stream scenarios is welcome to help reprioritize that spec work.

> As I understand it the primitive is not bytes, but the various views one can have upon an ArrayBuffer.

I don't really understand or agree with this. The primitive is bytes; those are what are being transported, and we are concerned with how to avoid buffer copies of those bytes. The use of typed arrays is just as [a convenient and idiomatic way of packaging up { buffer, byteOffset, byteLength }](https://esdiscuss.org/topic/idiomatic-representation-of-buffer-bytesread).

---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/streams/issues/405#issuecomment-157865233