- From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 23:56:42 -0700
- To: public-webapps@w3.org
On 8/24/11 11:36 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Charles Pritchard<chuck@jumis.com> wrote: > >>>> Prpoposed: >>>> >>>> FormData output with the x-www-form-urlencoded mime type: >>>> formData.toUrlEncodedBlob(xhr.send) >>>> >>>> If going down the blob path, these two would have the same end-result: >>>> formData.toMultipartBlob(xhr.send) >>>> xhr.send(formData); >>>> >>> What kind of API-style is this? >>> >>> >> [Supplemental] FormData >> void toMultipartBlob(in callback) >> void toUrlEncodedBlob(in callback) >> >> The first would create a multipart mime message, in a blob, and run the >> callback with the blob as the first argument, >> the second would create a urlencoded message, in a blob, and also run the >> callback. >> They'd set the appropriate content type on generated blob. >> > The syntax you've written above wouldn't work in JS. You're only > passing in a reference to the send function, not a reference to the > XHR object on which to call .send on. So > > formData.toMultipartBlob(xhr.send) > > is equivalent to > > formData.toMultipartBlob(XMLHttpRequest.prototype.send) > > So in this case you'd have to pass in two argument, the function and > the 'this' object. Or require people to use .bind. > > In general I'm not a fan of this syntax. > > / Jonas > > You're right on that end. Sorry for the confusion. xhr.send(formData) would be the same as: formData.toMultipartBlob(function(blob) { xhr.send(blob); }); I didn't mean to propose fancy scope items. -Charles
Received on Thursday, 25 August 2011 06:57:06 UTC