W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2009

Re: Alternative File API

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 11:37:10 +0200
To: arun@mozilla.com, "Michael Nordman" <michaeln@google.com>
Cc: "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>, "Garrett Smith" <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com>, "Webapps WG" <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.uywkz8vw64w2qv@annevk-t60>
On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:07:48 +0200, Arun Ranganathan <arun@mozilla.com> wrote:
> I'm willing to change the specification to support Events and Readers,  
> though I don't necessarily think it is "more JavaScripty."  I continue  
> to be concerned that we've made the model a bit more complex, but it  
> certainly is more powerful.  Progress Events seems to be the main use  
> case, and it seems our model has stretched to most elegantly accommodate  
> it.  So Data or BinaryData would no longer have accessors, but probably  
> have slice( ), size, etc.  Using the same 'isa' shorthand (which I  
> gather you're using from word grammar):
> Data -- represents raw data, has slice( ), has size
> File isa Data (File has mediaType, has url)
> DataReader isa EventTarget

I think having the flexibility is better. Presumably JavaScript libraries will continue to be around and provide convenience APIs. Come to think of it, maybe we should ask them to email some feedback on file API design to this list?

Anne van Kesteren
Received on Wednesday, 19 August 2009 09:38:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:18 UTC