- From: Aymeric Vitte <vitteaymeric@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 09:40:30 +0100
- To: Feras Moussa <feras.moussa@hotmail.com>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- CC: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
Yes for the different questions, I first mentioned it in [1] That's not an invention of mine, node is doing this: var handle=function(req,res) { var raw=fs.createReadStream(file); res.writeHead(200,head); //and the magic comes here: raw.pipe(zlib.createGzip()).pipe(res); }; http.createServer(handle).listen(80,function() {}); If the concept is correct and applicable (with promises), as previously mentioned, a good example could be WebCrypto: crypto.subtle.encrypt(aesAlgorithmEncrypt, aesKey, sourceStream).createStream() So the WebCrypto API does not have to be modified and just need to support the createStream method, so a two lines change in the spec. Regards, Aymeric [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2013JulSep/0593.html Le 04/11/2013 00:41, Feras Moussa a écrit : >> Streams instantiations somewhere make me think to the structured clone >> algorithm, as I proposed before there should be a method like a >> createStream so you just need to say for a given API that it supports >> this method and you don't have to modify the API except for specific >> cases (xhr,ws,etc), like for the structured clone algo, and this is missing. > This is an interesting idea. But I'm not entirely clear on your proposal. Is [1] where you mentioned it, or is there another thread I've missed? > > You're not proposing changing the stream constructor, but rather also defining a generic way an API can add support for stream by implementing a strongly-defined createStream method? > > Is your thinking to have this in order to give users a consistent way to obtain a stream from various APIs? > On first thought I like the idea, but I think once we settle on a definition of 'Stream', we can asses what is really required for other APIs to begin supporting it. If so, I can create a bug to track this concept. > > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2013OctDec/0246.html > > > ---------------------------------------- >> Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2013 23:16:12 +0100 >> From: vitteaymeric@gmail.com >> To: art.barstow@nokia.com >> CC: public-webapps@w3.org >> Subject: Re: CfC: publish WD of Streams API; deadline Nov 3 >> >> Yes, with good results, groups are throwing the ball to others... I >> don't know right now all the groups that might need to be involved, >> that's the reason of my question. >> >> 4 days out without internet connection, usually one email every two >> weeks on the subject and suddendly tons of emails, looks like a >> conspiracy... >> >> I will reread the threads (still perplex about some issues, a txt stream >> is a binary stream that should be piped to textEncoder/Decoder from my >> standpoint, making it a special case just complicates everything, maybe >> it's too late to revert this) but it looks like the consensus is to wait >> for Domenic's proposal, OK but as I mentioned he missed some points in >> the current proposal and it's interesting to read carefully the Overlap >> thread, and I find it important to have a simple way to handle >> ArrayBuffer, View, Blob without converting all the time. >> >> Streams instantiations somewhere make me think to the structured clone >> algorithm, as I proposed before there should be a method like a >> createStream so you just need to say for a given API that it supports >> this method and you don't have to modify the API except for specific >> cases (xhr,ws,etc), like for the structured clone algo, and this is missing. >> >> Regards >> >> Aymeric >> >> Le 03/11/2013 19:02, Arthur Barstow a écrit : >>> Hi Aymeric, >>> >>> On 10/29/13 7:22 AM, ext Aymeric Vitte wrote: >>>> Who is coordinating each group that should get involved? >>> I thought you agreed to do that ;). >>> >>>> MediaStream for example should be based on the Stream interface and >>>> all related streams proposals. >>> More seriously though, this is good to know, and if there is >>> additional coordination that needs to be done, please let us know. >>> >>> -Thanks, ArtB >>> >>> >> -- >> Peersm : http://www.peersm.com >> node-Tor : https://www.github.com/Ayms/node-Tor >> GitHub : https://www.github.com/Ayms >> >> -- Peersm : http://www.peersm.com node-Tor : https://www.github.com/Ayms/node-Tor GitHub : https://www.github.com/Ayms
Received on Monday, 4 November 2013 08:41:18 UTC