W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2010

Re: [FileAPI] Blob.URN?

From: Eric Uhrhane <ericu@google.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 17:34:09 -0700
Message-ID: <q2i44b058fe1004021734hc71538bdo17f27c93fc37eb07@mail.gmail.com>
To: Darin Fisher <darin@chromium.org>
Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Web Applications Working Group WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Darin Fisher <darin@chromium.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:22 AM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Darin Fisher <darin@chromium.org> wrote:
>> > Apologies if this has been discussed before, but I'm curious why URN is
>> > not
>> > a property of Blob.  It seems like it would be useful to be able to load
>> > a
>> > slice of a File.  For example, this could be used by an application to
>> > fetch
>> > all of its subresources out of a single file.
>>
>> IIRC originally it was placed on File since Blobs do not have a
>> content type. However I think there is general agreement that it
>> should be moved to Blob.
>>
>> However it would be great to be able to assign a content type to a
>> Blob. Possibly slice() could take a optional argument.
>>
>
> Adding an optional parameter to slice() sounds attractive indeed.
> BlobBuilder [1] should probably also have such an optional argument.
> -Darin
> [1] http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/file-system/file-writer.html#the-blobbuilder-interface

That seems reasonable.  But if we move the content type and
disposition to the Blob, and can get a URL from a Blob, then File is
left with...just a name?
Received on Saturday, 3 April 2010 00:34:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:38 GMT