On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 13:43:09 +0200, Charles McCathieNevile
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 28 May 2008 13:01:13 +0200, Anne van Kesteren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Yesterday someone contacted me on IRC about implementing
XMLHttpRequest.upload from XMLHttpRequest Level 2. It turns out that
the Progress Events specification is not generic enough for both
uploading and downloading as we agreed it should be long ago.
The ProgressEvent.loaded member should probably be defined in a more
abstract way
Can you explain in more detail what should be changed? (Feel free to
raise a new issue for this in the webapps tracker - otherwise I will
when I understasnd a bit more clearly what the issue is about).
Well, it says "Specifies the number of bytes downloaded since the
beginning of the download." for ProgressEvent.loaded for instance while
that same member should cover the "upload" cases (data transfer from
client to a server instead of the other way around).
and I would actually suggest to rename it to ProgressEvent.transferred
so it's clear that it is about transferred data.
Probably, but like many things we inherited a name and there are
existing implementations using it, so it seemed sensible to keep the
names stable.
From what I've read those implementations don't really impact the Web
platform. It doesn't seem good to make the Web platform less usable
because of those implementations. (In other words, I think this case is
significantly different from XMLHttpRequest.)
This is issue 119 [1] in the webapi tracker
[1] http://www.w3.org/2006/webapi/track/issues/119
Overall, but I think this issue was already raised, it's not really clear
which bits are filled in by the specification using Progress Events and
which bits are filled in by the Progress Events specification.
--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
