W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: XHR responseArrayBuffer attribute: suggestion to replace "asBlob" with "responseType"

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 11:54:21 +0200
To: "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: "Chris Rogers" <crogers@google.com>, "Web Applications Working Group WG" <public-webapps@w3.org>, "Eric Uhrhane" <ericu@google.com>, michaeln@google.com, "Darin Fisher" <darin@google.com>, "Alexey Proskuryakov" <ap@webkit.org>, "Chris Marrin" <cmarrin@apple.com>, "Geoffrey Garen" <ggaren@apple.com>, jorlow@google.com
Message-ID: <op.vk8a4urr64w2qv@anne-van-kesterens-macbook-pro.local>
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 02:43:58 +0200, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
> On 10/26/10 5:27 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> Boris, do you see value in the asBlob / responseBlob proposal currently
>> in the draft?
> The idea there being that you don't have to have the data in memory at  
> all unless the page explicitly asks for it, and then giving the page the  
> option of only mapping some of the data into memory?
> I think that's a good idea, yes.
> What I'm not quite sure about is why it needs to be a state flag which  
> makes it an open-time all-or-nothing decision, other than implementor  
> convenience....

Okay, so even for responseBlob you think it should be the implementor  
handling the complexity. I tend to agree with you and am glad you joined  
the discussion.

Anne van Kesteren
Received on Wednesday, 27 October 2010 09:55:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:13:13 UTC