Re: XHR responseArrayBuffer attribute: suggestion to replace "asBlob" with "responseType" from Maciej Stachowiak on 2010-10-29 (public-webapps@w3.org from October to December 2010)

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 22:12:46 -0700
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: James Robinson <jamesr@google.com>, Chris Rogers <crogers@google.com>, Geoffrey Garen <ggaren@apple.com>, Darin Fisher <darin@chromium.org>, Web Applications Working Group WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Eric Uhrhane <ericu@google.com>, michaeln@google.com, Alexey Proskuryakov <ap@webkit.org>, Chris Marrin <cmarrin@apple.com>, jorlow@google.com
Message-id: <5BBAB504-1174-4F4F-A59C-4069A29E2CAB@apple.com>

On Oct 28, 2010, at 9:41 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:

> On 10/29/10 12:15 AM, James Robinson wrote:
>> Are we talking about ArrayBuffer here or Blob?
> 
> The former.
> 
>> It's never acceptable to block javascript on a synchronous disk access
> 
> Why?
> 
> Other questions to consider:
> 
> 1)  Why is it ok to block it on a synchronous disk access due to being paged in but not to block on a synchronous disk access due to reading a file descriptor?  Or is the former not acceptable too?

These days, not every end-user system can be assumed to have paging.

Regards,
Maciej

Received on Friday, 29 October 2010 05:13:27 UTC