- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 11:51:39 -0500
- To: public-webapps@w3.org
On 1/30/12 11:44 AM, Bronislav Klučka wrote: > Both could be solved by Blob.URL, there is no strange string somehow > connected to blob. Blob belongs to URL and URL belongs to blob... who > cares how exactly is the string created (split -> join), it is string > identification, not pointer reference... That would mean that as soon as you access Blob.URL on a given Blob that Blob is then leaked for the lifetime of all documents which can touch that Blob object, right? Why is that desirable? >> The same blob should have different URLs in different documents, no? > All documents originated from the same application/session/same-origin? No. That's the point. Unless you want the lifetime of the Blob to immediately become "while you have any documents from this origin open". Or in more concrete terms, while you Google Reader is open, no Blobs on any google.com page that have had urls created for them would ever be collected. That seems very bad. > I'd prefer the same URL ( e.g. just passing string using > window.postMessage) . What if I move image element from one document to > another (from top window to iframe) should it have no identifiable > underlying data? I don't like that It's not great; the alternatives just seem worse. -Boris
Received on Monday, 30 January 2012 16:52:07 UTC