- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 09:48:34 +0200
- To: "Gregg Tavares" <gman@google.com>, arun@mozilla.com
- Cc: "Dmitry Titov" <dimich@chromium.org>, "Web Applications Working Group WG" <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Thu, 06 Aug 2009 01:10:31 +0200, Gregg Tavares <gman@google.com> wrote: > Why make a new API for getting the contents of a file (local or > otherwise) when we already have one which is XHR? XHR does not do local data. It also does not do raw file data very well. > What if FileList was just array of File objects where each File object is > just a URL in the format > > "filedata: uuid, filename" > > Then you can use that URL anywhere in HTML a URL is valid. script, img, > audio, video, css, AND XHR I agree that we need this functionality: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/thread.html#msg67 I'm not sure if feeding it to XHR makes sense though. Especially if you just want to do a partial read there would be quite a bit of overhead. > That would mean you wouldn't be adding a new API to get the contents of a > file. If you want the contents just use XHR and use the URL from the > File in the FileList. > > You could add a few more functions to XHR like request.getAsDataURL(), > request.getAsTextInEncodiing(), etc. if need be if they are needed It's an interesting idea, but overloading XMLHTtpRequest in this way does not seem like a good idea to me. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Thursday, 6 August 2009 07:49:43 UTC