W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2010

Re: File URN lifetimes and SharedWorkers

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 07:15:50 +0000 (UTC)
To: WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1007230714420.7242@ps20323.dreamhostps.com>
On Tue, 23 Feb 2010, Drew Wilson wrote:
>
> This was recently brought to my attention by one of the web app developers
> in my office:
> 
> http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/#lifeTime
> 
> User agents MUST ensure that the lifetime of File URN <#dfn-fileURN>s is the
> same as the lifetime of the Document [HTML5 <#HTML5>] of the origin script
> which spawned the File <#dfn-file> object on which the urn <#dfn-urn> attribute
> was called. When this Document is destroyed, implementations MUST treat
> requests for File URN <#dfn-fileURN>s created within thisDocument as 404 Not
> Found.[Processing Model <#processing-model-urn> for File URN <#dfn-fileURN>
> s]
> 
> I'm curious how this should work for SharedWorkers - let's imagine that I
> create a File object in a document and send it to a SharedWorker via
> postMessage() - the SharedWorker will receive a structured clone of that
> File object, which it can then access. What should the lifetime of the
> resulting URN for that file object be? I suspect the intent is that File
> objects ought to be tied to an owning script context rather than to a
> specific Document (so, in this case, the lifetime of the resulting URN would
> be the lifetime of the worker)?

Was this ever addressed? Do I need to add something to the workers spec 
for this? Who is currently editing the File API specs?

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 23 July 2010 07:16:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:40 GMT