There are quite a few things I'd like to do still on this draft, leaving
aside the question of changing the API, which I'd like to see more
discussion on [1]. It's worth documenting these things as "ToDos" so
the WG knows I'm working on them:
1. Terser, clearer prose on asynchronous accessor methods, including
better description of integration with HTML5 event loops.
2. Response to a number of public-webapps email that I haven't responded
to yet. There's quite a bit of feedback left. Of course, more is
always welcome :-)
3. Flesh out the processing model for filedata: URLs (e.g. add a 405
Method Not Allowed); right now we use a subset of HTTP response codes.
4. Raising the issue with TAG (or IETF/HTTPbis) about a new scheme
(filedata:) It may be wise to simply reuse the urn: scheme with UUIDs
[2], but I'll need more investigation about this. Discussion about the
proposed URL is likely to be lengthy :-\
5. Potentially removing getAsBase64
6. Formatting issues, especially changing the name of the CVS rep. It
is currently named to be /2006/webapi/FileUpload/publish/ which is
really misleading, since people are confusing "upload" with file
access. The '2006' and the 'FileUpload' are historical leftovers :-)
I hope to make headway on these issues by next week.
-- A*
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/0565.html
[2] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4122.txt
Dan Connolly wrote:
On Wed, 2009-08-12 at 13:55 -0700, Arun Ranganathan wrote:
[...]
Fixed; I hope the status is clearer now
yes; thanks for the quick fix.
(you may have to force a reload
to see the changes).
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileUpload/publish/FileAPI.html
-- A*
