W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > May 2009

RE: Overlap between WebApps and Device APIs WG on file operations

From: Marcin Hanclik <Marcin.Hanclik@access-company.com>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 19:17:35 +0200
To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, ext Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, Arun Ranganathan <arun@mozilla.com>
CC: public-device-apis <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-ID: <FAA1D89C5BAF1142A74AF116630A9F2C0A26ED8AE9@OBEEX01.obe.access-company.com>
Hi Art, All,

There is an overlap between BONDI FileSystem API and WebApps' File Upload spec.
I, however, agree with Robin that the motivations behind both specs were and seem to still be different.

The overlap is as follows.
BONDI FS API defines the following interfaces:
FileSystemSuccessCallback (related to BONDI Asynchronicity Model/Design Pattern)
Additionally BONDI specs created FileArray type (equal to sequence<File>).

WebApps' File Upload defines the following interfaces:
FileDialog (a UI aspect)

The basic overlap is around File and FileList/Array, with the following differences:
1. WebApps' File partially incorporates BONDI FileStream
2. WebApps' File cannot be written to, whereas BONDI File is a "standard" file known from other standards or programming interfaces.

There is currently also a different model for collection handling between BONDI specs and W3C specs.
All BONDI specs create Arrays based on WebIDL's sequence<T> for collections, whereas File Upload and e.g. WebStorage create specific list interface with item() method(s).

Additionally BONDI has a consistent error/exception definition/handling model (with related API Design Pattern). I.e. BONDI specs do not define new exceptions, but the BONDI methods/setters/getters throw interfaces instantiations. Those interfaces create "nice" hierarchical structure that enable clarity within BONDI specs.

I think that both specs have to be kept separately, whereas we could foresee that e.g. FileUpload could be based on FileSystem API, since FS API is richer for the overlapping interfaces (read-write vs. read-only). Alternatively the overlapping parts could be moved into another (sub)spec.
Definitely we should avoid name clashes, i.e. if both specs would define something called now "File" interface, one of them should change the name of that interface in case there is no agreement to merge or clearly relate those specs.


Kind regards,

Marcin Hanclik
ACCESS Systems Germany GmbH
Tel: +49-208-8290-6452  |  Fax: +49-208-8290-6465
Mobile: +49-163-8290-646
E-Mail: marcin.hanclik@access-company.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Arthur Barstow [mailto:art.barstow@nokia.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 5:57 PM
To: ext Dominique Hazael-Massieux; Charles McCathieNevile; Arun Ranganathan; Marcin Hanclik
Cc: public-device-apis
Subject: Re: Overlap between WebApps and Device APIs WG on file operations

Dom - Arun is the Editor of the latest File Upload Editor's Draft [1]
so I included him.

My expectation here is WebApps would continue to use the File Upload
spec to address file upload use cases.

Marcin proposed the FileSystem API so he should be to explain the
relationship between that API and WebApps' File Upload spec. My
expectation is the File System API would focus on file I/O type use
cases (as does Opera's File I/O spec).

-Regards, Art Barstow

[1] <http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileUpload/publish/FileUpload.html>

On May 13, 2009, at 10:39 AM, ext Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote:

> Hi,
> The current draft charter for the Device APIs Working Group [1] lists
> "FileSystem API, an API to access the file system and perform basic
> operations (Create, Read, Update, Delete) and more complex operations
> (e.g. mount, unmount)".
> The WebApps Working Group current charter [2] has "File Upload, an API
> to extend the existing file upload capabilities of User Agents (may
> include more generic file I/O operations)", with a first draft
> available
> at:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/file-upload/
> and I understand that Opera contribute a more complete API to the
> group
> at:
> http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/fileio/fileIO.htm
> Robin, as editor of the file-upload spec, can you see a difference
> between that work and the proposed work item in the device api
> charter?
> Art, as chair of WebApps, what's your view on this?
> If anyone from Opera can also comment on the fileIO spec, this
> would be
> more than welcome.
> I guess we need to determine if the new group either:
>  * needs to develop an API that completes the work done in WebApps
> (seems unlikely)
>  * would take over the work started in WebApps
>  * should NOT work on filesystem operations due to overlap with
> WebApps.
> Dom
> 1. http://www.w3.org/2009/05/DeviceAPICharter.html
> 2. http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/charter/


Access Systems Germany GmbH
Essener Strasse 5  |  D-46047 Oberhausen
HRB 13548 Amtsgericht Duisburg
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Michel Piquemal, Tomonori Watanabe, Yusuke Kanda


This e-mail and any attachments hereto may contain information that is privileged or confidential, and is intended for use only by the
individual or entity to which it is addressed. Any disclosure, copying or distribution of the information by anyone else is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this document in error, please notify us promptly by responding to this e-mail. Thank you.
Received on Wednesday, 13 May 2009 17:18:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:32:10 UTC