Re: Files on IndexedDB

I've made a slight addition to the spec:

https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/IndexedDB/rev/4c1aa0ba956e

This is more abstract than what you suggested, since we don't want to
dictate how implementations must implement it, just what the behavior is.
(Also, I didn't see your suggestion until I'd made the edit.)

Is that changed text is sufficient?


On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 3:01 AM, piranna@gmail.com <piranna@gmail.com>wrote:

> >> Actually, the response in [2] says that we should clarify in the spec
> >> that files, blobs and filelists are stored "by value" rather than "by
> >> reference". This is not a normative change since the spec already
> >> defines this behavior. However the behavior is defined somewhat
> >> indirectly which means that it'd make sense to clarify it explicitly.
> >
> >
> > Hi Jonas - ok. Would you or one of the other Editors please propose text
> to
> > address this comment so piranna can review it (or check in fix and then
> > provide the URL of the changeset)?
> >
> Since it seems that definitely expected behaviour is that both File
> and Blob and Filelist objects remain the status and content they had
> when they were inserted inside the IndexedDB database (unluckily for
> me, because I believed and needed to store live user filesystem
> objects :-( ), I think saying explicitly that "a copy of the File,
> FileList or Blob objects data must be done (being this copied data
> stored directly inside the IndexedDB database or in a hidden folder
> and later referenced, being whatever used method just an
> implementation detail transparent for the IndexedDB API user)" would
> be enough.
>
>
> --
> "Si quieres viajar alrededor del mundo y ser invitado a hablar en un
> monton de sitios diferentes, simplemente escribe un sistema operativo
> Unix."
> – Linus Tordvals, creador del sistema operativo Linux
>
>