- From: Eric Uhrhane <ericu@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 17:34:09 -0700
- To: Darin Fisher <darin@chromium.org>
- Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Web Applications Working Group WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Darin Fisher <darin@chromium.org> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:22 AM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Darin Fisher <darin@chromium.org> wrote: >> > Apologies if this has been discussed before, but I'm curious why URN is >> > not >> > a property of Blob. It seems like it would be useful to be able to load >> > a >> > slice of a File. For example, this could be used by an application to >> > fetch >> > all of its subresources out of a single file. >> >> IIRC originally it was placed on File since Blobs do not have a >> content type. However I think there is general agreement that it >> should be moved to Blob. >> >> However it would be great to be able to assign a content type to a >> Blob. Possibly slice() could take a optional argument. >> > > Adding an optional parameter to slice() sounds attractive indeed. > BlobBuilder [1] should probably also have such an optional argument. > -Darin > [1] http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/file-system/file-writer.html#the-blobbuilder-interface That seems reasonable. But if we move the content type and disposition to the Blob, and can get a URL from a Blob, then File is left with...just a name?
Received on Saturday, 3 April 2010 00:34:58 UTC