Re: File API for Review

2013-03-28 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 8:18 PM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote: Done. http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/#NetworkError Awesome! -- http://annevankesteren.nl/

Re: File API for Review

2013-03-27 Thread Arun Ranganathan
On Mar 25, 2013, at 1:52 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 5:45 PM, Arun Ranganathan aranganat...@mozilla.com wrote: So just to be clear, do you think we should remove 500-style responses altogether, and *completely defer* to network error, which essentially involves

Re: File API for Review

2013-03-25 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote: On Feb 13, 2013, at 11:37 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: We're not actually leaving what exactly to return open to implementors. They *must* return a 500. They *may* additionally provide a message, which is akin to

Re: File API for Review

2013-03-25 Thread Arun Ranganathan
- Anne vK said: - On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote: On Feb 13, 2013, at 11:37 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: We're not actually leaving what exactly to return open to implementors. They *must* return a 500. They *may* additionally provide

Re: File API for Review

2013-03-25 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 5:45 PM, Arun Ranganathan aranganat...@mozilla.com wrote: So just to be clear, do you think we should remove 500-style responses altogether, and *completely defer* to network error, which essentially involves throwing on expired / revoked / invalid Blob URLs? I'm ok

Re: File API for Review

2013-03-19 Thread Arun Ranganathan
On Feb 13, 2013, at 11:37 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: Specification bugs still exist I think we should rename URI to URL. That's what everyone is converging on. Done. I'm also not convinced that leaving what exactly to return in the HTTP scenario open to implementors is a good

Re: File API for Review

2013-03-13 Thread Arun Ranganathan
On Mar 8, 2013, at 8:28 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote: Additionally, I think http://www.w3.org/TR/FileAPI/#dfn-type should clarify that the browser must not use statistical methods to guess the charset parameter part of the type as part of determining the type. Firefox currently asks magic 8-ball,

Re: File API for Review

2013-03-08 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 9:09 PM, Arun Ranganathan aranganat...@mozilla.com wrote: I'm also not convinced that leaving what exactly to return in the HTTP scenario open to implementors is a good thing. We've been through such things before and learned that handwaving is bad. Lets just pick

Re: File API for Review

2013-03-08 Thread Henri Sivonen
Additionally, I think http://www.w3.org/TR/FileAPI/#dfn-type should clarify that the browser must not use statistical methods to guess the charset parameter part of the type as part of determining the type. Firefox currently asks magic 8-ball, but the magic 8-ball is broken. AFAICT, WebKit does

Re: File API for Review

2013-03-07 Thread Arun Ranganathan
Anne, On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 7:58 PM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote: 3. Progress events have been clarified. You're still using the old IDL syntax for event handlers. Fixed. I think we should rename URI to URL. That's what everyone is converging on. Fixed. I'm also

Re: File API for Review

2013-02-13 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Feb 6, 2013 8:59 PM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote: Greetings WebApps WG! Review on the File API is encouraged: http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/ A few substantial changes that might need particular attention before we initiate a call for LCWD or something comparably

Re: File API for Review

2013-02-13 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: On Feb 6, 2013 8:59 PM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote: http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/#convenienceAPI Given how recent this addition is, and given that it's fairly easy to implement in JS directly, I

Re: File API for Review

2013-02-13 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 7:58 PM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote: 3. Progress events have been clarified. You're still using the old IDL syntax for event handlers. Specification bugs still exist I think we should rename URI to URL. That's what everyone is converging on. I'm also not