Re: Updates to FileAPI

On Mon, 20 Dec 2010, Arun Ranganathan wrote:
> 
> http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/
> 
> Notably:
> 
> 1. lastModifiedDate returns a Date object.

You don't have a conformance requirement for returning a Date object. (The 
only MUST is for the case of the UA not being able to return the 
information.) I mention this because for attributes that return 
objects, it's important to specify whether the same object is returned 
each time or whether it's a new object that is created each time. 
Presumably for a Date object you want to require a new object be created 
each time.


> 2. We use the URL object and expose static methods on it for Blob URI 
> creation and revocation.

Looks good to me. FYI, I'm probably going to be extending this mechanism 
for Streams in due course. I expect I'll bring this up again in due course 
so we can work out how to make sure the specs don't step on each other.

I'm a little concerned about the lifetime of these URLs potentially 
exposing GC behaviour -- we've tried really hard not to expose GC 
behaviour in the past, for good reason. Can't we jetison the URLs as part 
of the unloading document cleanup steps?

http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/complete.html#unloading-document-cleanup-steps

(Note that Window objects in some edge cases can survive their Document.)


> Also, I've minuted Sam Weinig at TPAC saying he'd prefer us to roll back 
> from using the sequence<T> type WebIDL syntax to index getters.  Sam: 
> are you still tightly wed to this?  WebIDL has undergone changes since 
> last we spoke.  I'm copying what HTML5 is doing, and didn't want to be 
> inconsistent in rolling this back.

FWIW, IIRC the HTML spec is a bit out of sync when it comes to WebIDL.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Monday, 20 December 2010 22:11:10 UTC