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

Re: Storage Quota API

From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 17:18:40 -0700
Message-Id: <724830A1-CDF4-4F65-8AC0-F23773FEBC07@jumis.com>
Cc: "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>




On Sep 26, 2011, at 4:58 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU> wrote:

> On 9/26/11 7:53 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
>> The callback style is prevalent in the File API...
>> The enum style is also borrowed from
>> FileSystem.
> 
> Those are totally different things.  One of them is much saner than the other; it's not clear that either one is worth emulating in other specs in detail.

It occurs to me that permanent is just a priority indicator. Google's Chromebook systems have a warning in their file manager about how the archive can be wiped out. As an app developer, I've certainly noticed that a user -only- storing files inside of an application is taking a bigger risk than if they stored the files on their desktop.


What's the alternative to the callback style from the proposal? It should be async, as both requesting and checking quota may require async requests.
Received on Tuesday, 27 September 2011 00:19:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:47 GMT