W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2009

Re: File API commens

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 22:08:55 -0700
Message-ID: <63df84f0910082208q1ef1b4e1s40fe2cbc6b5e97f3@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: public-webapps@w3.org, arun@mozilla.com
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 7:10 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Oct 2009, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> >
>> > - why is a new URI scheme needed? Can't you just use urn:uuid?
>> I think we'd really like to avoid creating a new scheme if we could
>> reuse an existing one. I know Arun was looking for an existing scheme,
>> but not sure if he looked at the 'urn' scheme.
> I think we need a new URL scheme because otherwise we're going to end up
> with really complicated origin rules (e.g. the origin of
> "urn:isbn:0123..." is a unique ID, but the origin of "urn:uuid:0123..." is
> the special file API origin). Reusing urn:uuid would also mean basically
> hijacking the urn:uuid semantics in browsers and overriding them with
> something else, such that, e.g., nobody could reuse this scheme in other
> contexts if there was any risk of the context coming into contact with
> brosers.

Whatever scheme we're using for this feature we'll end up with a
somewhat messy origin situation. The origin will always have to be on
a per-uri bases, and can't be deduced from the uri alone.

> And of course there's the implementation cost; APIs generally
> make it much easier to implement a new scheme than to implement part of
> the space created by the urn: scheme.

This seems inherit to the urn scheme. I.e. anyone that implements it
will have to make it pluggable on the urn-namespace level. And anyone
implementing the uuid namespace will likely have to make it pluggable
on a per-uuid level.

So at first glance neither of these seem like a problem in Firefox.

However this might be especially easy in Firefox since Gecko has its
own network library. I'd be interested to get feedback from other UAs.

/ Jonas
Received on Friday, 9 October 2009 05:09:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:20 UTC