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

Re: ISSUE-104: supporting structured clones [XHR2]

From: Jeremy Orlow <jorlow@chromium.org>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 10:09:33 -0700
Message-ID: <5dd9e5c50909251009o7102cf15ycea3bfdfa45bb90f@mail.gmail.com>
To: Web Applications Working Group WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 7:25 AM, Web Applications Working Group Issue
Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org <sysbot%2Btracker@w3.org>> wrote:

>
> ISSUE-104: supporting structured clones [XHR2]
>
> http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/issues/104
>
> Raised by: Anne van Kesteren
> On product: XHR2
>
> It would be nice to support the HTML5 concept of structured clones for both
> sending and receiving. Prerequisite of that is getting a serialization
> format defined and preferably some kind of media type for it. (I think this
> would be better than supporting JSON.)
>

I can't access the issue tracker, so I'm replying here.
What's the use case for this?  As far as I can tell, everything that
Structured Clones support is either 1) easy to serialize into JSON, 2)
expensive to serialize, or 3) silly to serialize.

An example of 2 would be ImageData.  An example of 3 would be RegEx's.  File
and FileData would fit either in 2 or 3 depending on how you implemented
them.

My point is that I don't see a strong reason why Structured Clones would be
useful outside of the browser.  And thus I'm not sure it's worth the effort
to create a standardized way of serializing it.

But maybe I'm missing something?
Received on Friday, 25 September 2009 17:10:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:33 GMT