W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2012

Re: Lazy Blob

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 13:50:00 -0600
Message-ID: <CACQ=j+f2ejSkFpVHn13NhThnCX5FiXaih7woV7-cJrnYDznejg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com>
Cc: Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, Jungkee Song <jungkee.song@samsung.com>
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:

>
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>  On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:
>>
>>> So? Why should lazy blob be specific to HTTP specific semantics when an
>>> arbitrary URL is not specific to HTTP?
>>>
>>
>> So if you want to have a lazy reader on Websockets you have either:
>> 1) respecify the websocket protocol to include content semantics for
>> accessing resources defined by an URL and having a specified size OR
>> 2) define an additional protocol on top of websockets, which websockets
>> know nothing about, that allows a custom implementation at the server side
>> to respond in a meaningful fashion to resource range requests.
>>
>
> OR define a mechanism for LazyBlob that permits the injection of app
> specific code into the underlying LazyBlob reader loop.
>

Further, a default behavior in the absence of such an injection might be
defined simply to read data from the WS and stuff into the blob.
Received on Wednesday, 1 August 2012 19:50:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:54 GMT