- From: Michael A. Puls II <shadow2531@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 18:15:55 -0500
- To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, uri@w3.org, "Rich Tibbett" <richt@opera.com>
On Thu, 13 Jan 2011 05:23:32 -0500, Rich Tibbett <richt@opera.com> wrote: > Bumping this thread [1] in the hope someone could provide an update on > its status. > > On 24.02.2010 05:58, Michael A. Puls II wrote: > > On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 05:34:55 -0500, Julian Reschke > <julian.reschke@gmx.de> > > wrote: > > > > > On 24.02.2010 08:04, Michael A. Puls II wrote: > > >> I have a web page that's meant to run locally via file:. It uses > XHR to > > >> load a vcard file. I then scan the file and convert it to a > different > > >> text file format. > > >> > > >> I want to provide a save link for the new file format, so I > decided to > > >> use a data URI. But, I want clicking on the data URI link to show > an > > >> open/save dialog. > > >> > > >> I was able to do this by using <a > > >> href="data:application/octetstream;charset=utf-8,file_data" > > >> target="_blank">Save</a>. > > >> > > >> However, there are 2 problems. > > >> > > >> 1. There doesn't seem to be a way to give a filename hint. > > >> > > >> 2. I'd rather not use the octetstream mime type just to trigger a > save > > >> dialog. > > >> > > >> With that said, I think it'd be awesome if you could do something > like: > > >> > > >> <a > > >> > > > href="data:text/plain;charset=utf-8;filename=tada.txt;content-disposition=attachment,file_data">Save</a>. > > > > >> > > >> > > >> Setting aside the File API work, what about specifying those two > in an > > >> update to the data URI RFC? Any vendors against implementing > support > > for > > >> it? > > > > > > Sounds like a nice idea; a few thoughts: > > > > > > - Given the sad state of data URI parsing in UAs, it may be hard to > > > deploy this extension; did you make tests whether existing UAs > properly > > > parse (== ignore) new parameters? > > > > I tested a little in Safari, Opera, Firefox and IE. The extra params > don't > > seem to bother Firefox, Safari and Opera. I can't get data URIs to > work at > > all in IE atm, so... > > > > However, I didn't test complex filename values and the different ways > you > > can encode them. If I remember correctly, IE handles filename values > > differently than the RFC and other browsers. > > > > So, I suspect that IE will probably give the most trouble. Although, > I'm > > sure I could find bugs in the other browsers too. > > > > But, I'm hopeful that it wouldn't be too hard for browsers to support. > > > > > - An alternative would to define a way to include arbitrary > headers; so > > > that Content-Disposition could be used as defined (but this may get > > > messy) > > > > > > - It would be nice to align this with the current IETF work on > > > rephrasing RFC 2231 and RFC 2183 for use in HTTP... > > > > Thanks > > > > So did any changes come out of this thread pertaining to RFC 2397 [2] or > the RFCs mentioned above? Should it be discussed in the IETF and if so > where? No changes that I know of. But, I like the <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2010Mar/0004.html> idea the best and am still waiting for comments on that. > We've been discussing around this exact issue within the W3C DAP Working > Group and it would be great to know the exact, consistent behavior to > expect on clicking a data URI [3]. > > Thanks, > > Rich > > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2010Feb/0060.html > [2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2397 > [3] > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2011Jan/0031.html > -- Michael
Received on Thursday, 13 January 2011 23:16:24 UTC