W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2011

Re: [FileAPI] FileReader.abort() and File[Saver|Writer].abort have different behaviors

From: Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 18:09:06 -0400
Message-ID: <CABirCh-Gj9tHGm=bO99HrfEa3cracp_FrycKatLBhoedZ1X2PA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eric U <ericu@google.com>
Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, arun@mozilla.com, Kyle Huey <me@kylehuey.com>, public-webapps@w3.org, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Eric U <ericu@google.com> wrote:

> If we want the file specs to match the XHR spec, then we can just
> leave this as it is in File Reader, and I'll match it in File Writer.
> Recursion depth limit is up to the UA to set.  But I look forward to
> hearing what Anne has to say about it before we settle on copying it.

In my opinion, providing the "no nesting" guarantee is more useful than
being consistent with XHR, if all new APIs provide it.

This sort of thing seems obviously useful:

function showActivity(obj)
    obj.addEventHandler("loadstart", function() { div.hidden = false; },
    obj.addEventHandler("loadend", function() { div.hidden = true; },

With the currently specced behavior, this doesn't work--the div would end up
hidden when it should be shown.  You shouldn't have to care how other code
is triggering reads to do something this simple.

Glenn Maynard
Received on Wednesday, 21 September 2011 22:09:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 February 2015 14:36:53 UTC