W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > August 2011

[whatwg] createObjectURL(stream) protocol issue

From: Darin Fisher <darin@chromium.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 16:48:02 -0700
Message-ID: <CAP0-QptT65SGr3OiFoE7vnWXaGjzv2F7JutPuWxF2BH1Lanp0g@mail.gmail.com>
Putting implementation details aside, I agree that it is a bit unfortunate
to refer to a stream as a blob.  So far, blobs have always referred to
static, fixed-size things.

This function was originally named createBlobURL, but it was renamed
createObjectURL precisely because we imagined it being useful to pass things
that were not blobs to it.  It seems reasonable that passing a Foo object to
createObjectURL might mint a different URL type than what we would mint for
a Bar object.

It could also be the case that using blob: for referring to Blobs was
unfortunate.  Maybe we do not really need separate URL schemes for static,
fixed size things and streams.

Hmm...
-Darin



On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 2:13 AM, Tommy Widenflycht (?????) <
tommyw at google.com> wrote:

> Would it be possible to give the associated URL for a mediastream to have
> its own protocol, for example mediastream:, instead of the proposed blob:?
>
> window . URL . createObjectURL(stream)
> Mints a Blob URL to refer to the given MediaStream.
>
>
> This would tremendously help the implementation.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Tommy
>
>
> --
> Tommy Widenflycht, Senior Software Engineer
> Google Sweden AB, Kungsbron 2, SE-11122 Stockholm, Sweden
> Org. nr. 556656-6880
> And yes, I have to include the above in every outgoing email according to
> EU
> law.
>
Received on Friday, 12 August 2011 16:48:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:35 UTC