On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 22:26:20 +0100, Arun Ranganathan <a...@mozilla.com>
wrote:
1. I agree that name consistency is desirable, so mediaType is now
simply type. I'll point out that <style>.type expects very few types
back, whereas for files, the picture is more complicated, so simply
calling it type has drawbacks, but since mediaType isn't used elsewhere
on the platform, I agreed that reusing the same name was desirable.
Yay! Now can we please get File.URL too? :-) (It does not matter what the
scheme ends up being, they're all URLs as far as author-facing APIs
elsewhere are concerned, as mentioned before.)
--
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
