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

Re: Updates to FileAPI

From: Arun Ranganathan <arun@mozilla.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 17:02:32 -0500
Message-ID: <4D1123F8.7060506@mozilla.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: Michael Nordman <michaeln@google.com>, Jian Li <jianli@chromium.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Eric Uhrhane <ericu@google.com>, Web Applications Working Group WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 12/21/10 4:08 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Arun Ranganathan<arun@mozilla.com>  wrote:
>> There are more rigid conformance requirements around lastModifiedDate.
>>
>> http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/#dfn-lastModifiedDate
> """
> The last modified date of the file; on getting, this MUST return a
> Date object [HTML5] with the last modified date on disk. On getting,
> user agents MUST create a new Date object with the last modified date
> on disk; a different Date object MUST be returned each time. On
> getting, if user agents cannot make this information available, they
> MUST return null; on getting, even if the user agent could make this
> information available on previous gets, if it cannot make this
> information available on the current access it MUST return null.
> """
>
> This is worded really confusingly - there are 4 "on getting"s, and two
> of the phrases are just duplicating information expressed in previous
> phrases.  Can we get something clearer, like this:
>
> """
> The last modified date of the file.  On getting, if user agents can
> make this information available, this MUST return a fresh Date object
> initialized to the last modified date of the file; otherwise, this
> MUST return null.

This is a great correction (thanks for supplying good prose!) which I'll 
gladly make.  I agree that it is confusing.

-- A*
Received on Tuesday, 21 December 2010 22:03:14 GMT

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