Re: Lazy Blob

On Aug 2, 2012, at 14:51 , Tobie Langel wrote:
> On 8/2/12 2:29 PM, "Robin Berjon" <robin@berjon.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 2, 2012, at 10:45 , Tobie Langel wrote:
>>> On 8/1/12 10:04 PM, "Glenn Maynard" <glenn@zewt.org> wrote:
>>>> Can we please stop saying "lazy blob"?  It's a confused and confusing
>>>> phrase.  Blobs are "lazy" by design.
>>> 
>>> Yes. "Remote blob" is more accurate and should help think about this
>>> problem in a more meaningful way.
>> 
>> Actually, you need both to be accurate. With the current stack you can
>> have lazy blobs, and you can have remote blobs, but you can't have both
>> at the same time. If we're going to be strict about naming this, we're
>> talking about remote lazy blobs.
> 
> What's a "remote blob" in the current stack?

Setting responseType to blob on an XHR request.

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon

Received on Monday, 6 August 2012 12:34:48 UTC