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

RE: Discussion of File API at TPAC in Lyon

From: Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 23:38:14 +0000
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Arun Ranganathan <aranganathan@mozilla.com>
CC: Web Applications Working Group WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-ID: <104E6B5B6535E849970CDFBB1C5216EB3C91C462@TK5EX14MBXC138.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
On Thursday, November 11, 2010 11:47 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> Oh, definitely, we still need the createObjectURL/revokeObjectURL
> functions. Sorry, that was probably unclear.
> 
> However we're still left without a place to put them. Maybe it's as
> simple as putting them on the document object? That works nicely since
> their lifetime is scoped to that of the document object.
> 
> Another possibility is putting them on the URL interface object. I.e.
> not using URL objects themselves, but rather something like this:
> 
> x = URL.createObjectURL(myblock);
> typeof x == "string";
> URL.revokeObjectURL(x);
> 
> But I think I prefer the document solution.

I thought we'd decided on a new global object and just needed to come up with a name. This is what we're currently planning to do. Mostly though, I just want us to decide. This seems to have changed every month for a long time and I'd like us to pick a solution and stick to it.

>From http://www.w3.org/2010/11/02-webapps-minutes.html#item16
> jonas: the proposed solution is some global object where we put 2 functions
> anne: is there some existing place we could put them?
> sam: maybe window.blob? but you want to do it for stream too so maybe that's not a good place
> ericu and others: k, let's move on
Received on Friday, 12 November 2010 23:38:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:42 GMT