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

[whatwg] Drag-and-drop folders/files support with directory structure using DirectoryEntry

From: Kinuko Yasuda <kinuko@chromium.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 00:09:02 +0900
Message-ID: <CAMWgRNZF4VKCScEcSWr30n6_0VMF1km+Xexp_bNbyQLGO6whDQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas at sicking.cc> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Glenn Maynard <glenn at zewt.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas at sicking.cc> wrote:
>>>
>>> Adding FileEntry/DirectoryEntry seems confusing since those are
>>> generally writable in the FileSystem API spec, right? Additionally,
>>> DirectoryEntry is asynchronous, which makes enumerating the tree more
>>> painful.
>>>
>>> The way we were planning on exposing this in Gecko is to simply set
>>> File.name to the full relative path to the folder dropped. So in the
>>> example above, if the user dropped the "Photos" folder from the
>>> example above on a page, we'd make .files return a list of 7 Files,
>>> with names like "Photos/trip/1.jpg", "Photos/trip/2.jpg",
>>> "Photos/trip/3.jpg", "Photos/halloween/a.jpg", etc.
>>
>> That requires a full directory traversal in advance to find all of the
>> files, though; the tree could be very large.? For example, a sharded
>> directory tree containing hundreds of thousands of files with individual
>> frames of a video isn't unheard of, and there's no need to read it all in
>> advance.? Directory trees with tens of thousands of photos, audio clips,
>> emails (Maildir), etc. aren't uncommon, either.
>>
>> DirectoryEntry's asynchronous API seems to have the same advantages here as
>> they do for regular filesystem access.? It would also set the stage for
>> exposing writable directories down the line (eg. drag an input and output
>> directory for file processing), after the security issues are figured out.
>
> You need to do that anyway to implement the .files attribute, no?

Yes, but even we provide the attribute today it wouldn't give the best
user experience or could be broken with some likely scenarios.

If we could think of better option I think we should make it available.

> / Jonas
>
Received on Wednesday, 16 November 2011 07:09:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:37 UTC