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

Re: Discussion of File API at TPAC in Lyon

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 17:54:10 -0800
Message-ID: <AANLkTimvEsqEMPGKLOw+HZxBuE8qPGwW_L9EApRzoccr@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>, Arun Ranganathan <aranganathan@mozilla.com>, Web Applications Working Group WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
>> Maybe using a global object is better since we don't really want these
>> functions to appear on documents created using XMLHttpRequest,
>> DOMParser, etc.
>>
>> Quick, someone suggest a name, whoever comes up with one first wins a
>> beer for next TPAC :)
>
> I think that whoever suggested URL already wins that beer.  ^_^

I guess me and Anne will have to split it then, since he proposed
using the URL constructor, and I said that I didn't like using the
constructor but suggested putting the functions on the URL interface
object. Though it's quite possible that someone beat me to that
proposal, in which case they better speak up or loose a beer forever
:-)

The downside of using URL though is that both Firefox and IE, and I
think Chrome too, seems to be ready to ship
createObjectURL/revokeObjectURL very soon, much sooner than the URL
object will be fully specified. That means that if we set up the URL
interface object for createObjectURL/revokeObjectURL, then it'll be
harder to feature detect support for the "real" URL object.

Other than that I'd be happy to use URL.

/ Jonas
Received on Saturday, 13 November 2010 01:55:10 GMT

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