On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 9:35 PM, Glenn Maynard <gl...@zewt.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com> wrote: > >> I don't particularly care if a default behavior for WS is provided that >> buffers the entire read stream. >> > > Sorry, but that doesn't make sense. You don't access a message-based > protocol (Web Sockets) using a character-based API (Blob). They're utterly > different APIs. > Have you read the Blob interface spec? To quote: This interface represents *immutable* raw data. It provides a method to slice <http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/#dfn-slice> data objects between ranges of bytes into further chunks of raw data. The last time I checked, bytes are bytes, not characters. The fact that the interface provides access to those bytes via a particular string encoding is irrelevant. > > I'll leave the details of defining this to the proposers of lazy blob. >> > > You're free to come up with your own proposal, of course, and editors and > vendors will choose among them (or come up with something else, or reject > the idea entirely) as they always do, but others are not obligated to twist > their proposals to your demands. > Of course, implementers are free to ignore whatever they want, but last time I checked, the W3C was a consensus based standards organization which means agreement needs to be reached on what specs go out the door and what are in those specs. Since this is a W3C ML and not an implementers' forum, then I will continue to assume that the W3C process applies. There is a fixed obligation for editors and WG to address comments. They can't simply be rejected because they require work on the part of the editors or proposers.