On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 4:08 AM, Anne van Kesteren <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 07:55:58 +0200, David Flanagan <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> I doubt I understand all the implementation issues. But if there really >> is some reason to have this blob/non-blob decision point before calling >> send(), can I suggest that instead of confusing the XHR API with it, it be >> moved into a separate BlobHttpRequest interface that has only reponseBlob >> and does not even define responseText, etc. > > Brainstorming here. We could choose to always expose resonseArrayBuffer and > keep it together with responseText and responseXML. And for applications > that are worried about memory usage or care about very large files we could > have BlobXMLHttpRequest similar to AnonXMLHttpRequest. We'd abstract some > things out from XMLHttpRequest so BlobXMLHttpRequest does not have the other > response* members and so that AnonXMLHttpRequest does not need > withCredentials and the fourth and fifth parameter to open().
Could we, um, not include the word "XML" in any new things? BlobHttpRequest seems much less silly. ~TJ
