- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 12:29:11 +0100
- To: arun@mozilla.com
- Cc: "WebApps WG" <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 11:36:33 +0100, Arun Ranganathan <arun@mozilla.com> wrote: > Anne van Kesteren wrote: >> This should be a bit more exact as to how the mediaType is returned. I >> would prefer ASCII-lowercase. > > Done. The current text says the string is ASCII-encoded. That's not true. It's in 16bit code points like any other DOMString. >> Returning "application/octet-stream" rather than null also seems better >> if the type is not known. That way you do not have to type check. Other >> parts of the platform also handle "application/octet-stream" as unknown. > > It's been pointed out that user agents type check on files. If the > mediaType is not known, users invoking the attribute can't do anything > useful with it, so null is better. What are the use cases for using > application/octet-stream instead? I guess not known might be useful. Can't we just make it the empty string then? I don't really see the need to return something other than a DOMString. >> Also, maybe we should just call this type? File.type seems unambiguous >> enough. > > "mediaType" is more specific than "type". But it is less consistent with <style>.type, <script>.type, <link>.type, etc. I'm not sure we use mediaType anywhere right now. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Monday, 16 November 2009 11:29:57 UTC