W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: Discussion of File API at TPAC in Lyon

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 12:01:44 +0100
To: "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>, "Arun Ranganathan" <aranganathan@mozilla.com>
Cc: "Web Applications Working Group WG" <public-webapps@w3.org>, "Jian Li" <jianli@chromium.org>, "Eric Uhrhane" <ericu@google.com>
Message-ID: <op.vl10w5u364w2qv@anne-van-kesterens-macbook-pro.local>
On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 22:06:59 +0100, Arun Ranganathan  
<aranganathan@mozilla.com> wrote:
> If we're going to keep both functions around, then it's honestly not  
> *that much* of an improvement to move them from window* to document*, is  
> it?

Polluting the global object less is always a win.


> In this case, since we're going to add something to HTMLImageElement,  
> why not leave createObjectURL and revokeObject URL well alone as part of  
> window*?

These seem like separate issues.


> So it looks like we'll add a [Supplemental] to interfaces like  
> HTMLImageElement allowing them to take a "src" object, and we can then  
> define *that* src object to accomodate Stream and Blob use case  
> scenarios.  I'm amenable to first introducing that extension to  
> HTMLImageElement in File API if everyone else is :)

It is probably better to do this directly in HTML5.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Friday, 12 November 2010 11:02:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:41 GMT