Thanks for the explanation. The getURN method is an interesting proposal.
It seems useful even when you do have a File because you might want to
force the file contents to be loaded as a particular media type.
-Darin
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 7:40 PM, Michael Nordman micha...@google.comwrote:
The Blob.getURN proposal from Eric Uhrhane might be a better way to solve
the C-D issue:
http://www.mail-archive.com/public-webapps@w3.org/msg06137.html
It would give the user the ability to control whether a URN loaded into an
IFRAME triggers a download or not.
-Darin
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 03:40:36 +0100, Michael Nordman micha...@google.com
wrote:
This has been discussed before, not sure what the conclusion was (if any)
http://www.mail-archive.com/public-webapps@w3.org/msg06137.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/public-webapps@w3.org/msg06345.htmlsnip
In order
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 04:24:45 +0100, Sebastián Ramírez
sebast...@artedemagia.com wrote:
I want to know if I am understanding or misinterpreting the spec and
what, by the spec, is what I'm supposed to be able to use.
Everything that authors can use is expressed in the Web IDL fragment.
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 22:22:37 +0100, Darin Fisher da...@chromium.org
wrote:
Why couldn't FormData.append(Blob) provide optional parameters to allow
the caller to specify the name and type?
Why wouldn't you provide a File object instead then? It seems a lot of use
cases here and elsewhere
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 4:53 PM, Ryan Seddon seddon.r...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 1:06 PM, John Gregg john...@google.com wrote:
After the extensive discussion several weeks ago, I've been working on a
new draft for Web Notifications which is now available at
Many thanks.
El 24 de marzo de 2010 05:54, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com escribió:
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 04:24:45 +0100, Sebastián Ramírez
sebast...@artedemagia.com wrote:
I want to know if I am understanding or misinterpreting the spec and what,
by the spec, is what I'm supposed to be
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 2:55 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 22:22:37 +0100, Darin Fisher da...@chromium.org
wrote:
Why couldn't FormData.append(Blob) provide optional parameters to allow
the caller to specify the name and type?
Why wouldn't you provide a
Wouldn't it be better to have a constructor for File. File(Blob, name,
type, contentdisposition).
That could work, not sure its as intuitive. I think Files are destined to be
more often returned by various APIs and less often constructed by
application code directly. Wrapping a File/Blob in
Those seem to open up so many edge cases...
If we have a File constructor like this, now we have a new category of File
objects that do have names but are not related to actual files on a local
file system, and perhaps have different lifetime expectations.
Ability to specify a name and content
Hi Robin,
I'm not sure how far forward we are with this but looking at the
security considerations, it would be useful to have the examples for
implementers to understand where we're coming from with the concerns.
For your info, this was the original proposal I discussed with Marcin:
Security
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 7:07 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Fri, 4 Sep 2009, Dumitru Daniliuc wrote:
When talking about statement error callbacks (point #6, section 4.3.2), the
spec says:
1. If the error callback returns false, then move on to the next statement,
if any, or onto the
On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 01:39:42 +0100, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
For the record, when a
callback defined in the IDL to return a boolean actually returns a
non-boolean value, it is my understanding that WebIDL requires that
ToBoolean() be applied to the return value. So returning nothing or
13 matches
Mail list logo
