- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:01:14 -0700
- To: Eric Uhrhane <ericu@google.com>
- Cc: arun@mozilla.com, Web Applications Working Group WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, public-device-apis <public-device-apis@w3.org>
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Eric Uhrhane <ericu@google.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Arun Ranganathan <arun@mozilla.com> wrote: >> Greetings WebApps WG, >> >> I have made edits to the File API specification [1]. There are a few things >> of note that I'd like to call the WG's attention to. >> >> 1. There is a name change in effect. FileReader has been re-named >> BlobReader, upon request from Chrome team folks[2][3]. The name >> "BlobReader" won't win awards in a beauty pageant, but it tersely describes >> an object to read Blobs (which could originate from the underlying file >> system *or* be generated *within* a Web App). My present understanding is >> that FileWriter will also undergo a name change. Naming is really hard. >> Firefox already ships with FileReader, but I see the point of having an >> object named for what it does, which in this case is certainly more than >> file reading from the underlying file system. I also abhor bike shedding, >> especially over naming, but this is something that's exposed to the authors. >> I have not renamed FileError or FileException. In the case of errors and >> exceptions, I think *most* scenarios will occur as a result of issues with >> the underlying file system. These names should remain. > > I've just made the corresponding changes to FileWriter [->BlobWriter] > in both the FileWriter and FileSystem specs. I've not changed the URL > of the FileWriter spec, though, for simplicity. I have to say, I'm not a big fan of these name changes for two reasons: 1. While technically speaking, the functions on FileReader/BlobReader does accept Blobs rather than Files, I suspect that in most cases people will be dealing with files. I.e. I think it will be far more common that the Blob being passed in to the reader is in fact also a File, and is thought of by the developer as a file, than not. So while it seems strange to use a FileReader to read a Blob, it feels equally foreign to use a BlobReader to read a file. 2. Firefox 3.6 is already shipping with a FileReader implementation. Large parts of the spec remained stable and without request for changes for quite a while and we deemed it unlikely to change. Indeed, no other changes have been requested, other than the name change, in the parts that we implemented. I certainly agree that anyone shipping an implementation before a spec is an official Recommendation is always running the risk of running in to incompatible changes. However in the past we have avoided to break existing implementations, and I certainly can't think of a time we've decided to do it over what is essentially a bikeshed issue. / Jonas
Received on Monday, 28 June 2010 22:02:08 UTC