Re: [w3c/FileAPI] Support `Response` in `URL.createObjectURL` (#97)

@mkruisselbrink my use case is generally the creation of ESM in memory, I have mentioned that several times and even spent quite a bit of effort trying to see how to make ESM able to be instrumented in [Service Workers](https://github.com/bmeck/node-sw-compat-loader-test), HTTP Servers](https://github.com/bmeck/esm-http-server), and seeing if I could get any hooks into the [HTML specification](https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/2640). In general, all of this effort results in similar to the comment you had above about "what is the use case". The use cases are many but in general can be summarized as having a way to generate any non-trivial transformation of either specifier location or response body for ESM records. My annoyance is mostly coming from that not being seen as:

> But in either case, I don't see here or in the other issue what the use case is where you actually need these mutually recursive blob URLs.

Which for this issue it isn't purely about mutually recursive URLs, unlike the previous one.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/FileAPI/issues/97#issuecomment-365048871