- From: Bronislav Klučka <Bronislav.Klucka@bauglir.com>
- Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 20:43:56 +0100
- To: public-webapps@w3.org
On 24.2.2012 20:12, Arun Ranganathan wrote: > Bronislav, > > >> I could also go with reverse approach, with createObjectURL being >> oneTimeOnly by default >> createObjectURL(Blob aBlob, boolean? isPermanent) >> instead of current >> createObjectURL(Blob aBlob, boolean? isOneTime) >> the fact, that user would have to explicitly specify, that such URL >> is >> permanent should limit cases of "I forgot to release something >> somewhere"... and I thing could be easier to understant, that >> explicit >> request for pemranent = explicit release. Would break current >> implementations, sure, but if we are considering changes.... > > So, having these URLs be "oneTimeOnly" by default itself has issues, as Glenn (and Darin) point out: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012JanMar/0377.html > > The existing model makes that scenario false by default, trading off anything "racy" against culling strings. We are back in an issue of someone using oneTimeOnly or permanent in an inappropriate case. Programmers should be aware of what they are doing. I actually have no problem with current specification (rermanent as default, expicit release), I'm just trying to prevent changes like assigning object to string attribute (e.g. src), returning innerHTML with empty string attribute (e.g. src) Brona.
Received on Friday, 24 February 2012 19:44:21 UTC