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

Re: revokeObjectURL behavior

From: Arun Ranganathan <aranganathan@mozilla.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 10:33:31 -0800 (PST)
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: Webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Message-ID: <1726092535.379468.1290105211168.JavaMail.root@cm-mail03.mozilla.org>


----- Original Message -----
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 19:11:40 +0100, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> What's the use case? Do you really expect authors to use it?
> >
> > I was trying to think of something other than throwing. But maybe
> > throwing
> > for incorrect usage is best.
> 
> My suggested behavior was to do nothing for incorrect usage. I.e. when
> trying to revoke a different-origin URL or something that isn't a
> generated URL at all.
> 
> See the last paragraph of my original email.


Your recommendation -- namely that we do nothing for incorrect usage, but that user agents MAY warn on the error console -- is what the spec. says today for *revokeObjectURL.  Although throwing would be useful, I'm not totally convinced developers use this correctly, so in this API we've always avoided throwing unless unavoidable (e.g. take the case of slice).

-- A*
Received on Thursday, 18 November 2010 18:34:05 GMT

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