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

Re: Use cases (appcache, etc) [progress]

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 21:21:37 +0200
To: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>, "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: "WebApps WG" <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.u135ebcfwxe0ny@widsith.local>
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:45:16 +0200, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>  

> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:00:27 +0200, Charles McCathieNevile  
> <chaals@opera.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:14:00 +0200, Anne van Kesteren  
>> <annevk@opera.com> wrote:
>>> Actually that request would not change anything. As far as  
>>> XMLHttpRequest goes it would still transfer only a single entity.
>> In the sense that it is a single transaction, sure. But conceptually it  
>> is transferring something known to be divisible into a set of entities  
>> (that's the point of the request :) ).
> Most things are divisible into a set of entities. Fact remains that  
> we're dealing with a single entity body here as far as HTTP is concerned  
> and that progress events are supposed to deal with entity bodies.

It doesn't say that anywhere. It says that is the typical case, but specs  
can define what they deal with.

> Changing that for FormData does not make sense.

You mean changing what the XHR spec says causes progress events to fire  
(e.g. by looking inside the data sent for boundaries of enitities)? Quite  
possibly not. It's just mentioned as a possibility.

If you want to build more interesting UIs, and allow authors to use things  
as they arrive, then there are quite some changes to make and they are  
probably not trivial. Maybe trying to layer all that on top of FormData is  
a mistake - but considering the question of whether that means you go for  
a more complex solution than formadata, or give away the extra possibility  
for now, is probably worth giving people a few minutes to consider.

Personally I suspect the answer is to go with FormData and skip the  
complexity, because I can't see compelling use cases for trying to make a  
more complicated approach to loading data. But I have been wrong before.

(Not sure that I would suggest anyone spend a lot longer on it - different  
people's perspectives seem as likely to lead to the right answer as one  
person trying to think of everything).



Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals       Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
Received on Tuesday, 20 October 2009 19:22:14 UTC

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