On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 03:22:40 +0200, Charles Pritchard ch...@jumis.com
wrote:
Are there any objections to adding a Blob serialization method to the
FormData interface?
I still maintain my objection, yes. It is too soon to make FormData more
complicated. Are JavaScript libraries offering the
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 21:49:19 +0200, Charles Pritchard ch...@jumis.com
wrote:
Many services use form-urlencoded for form data, though not for files,
and typically not for large strings.
Google's Picasa uses multipart/related instead of multipart/form-data.
I believe that Google App engine has
On 8/30/2011 11:03 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 21:49:19 +0200, Charles Pritchard
ch...@jumis.com wrote:
Many services use form-urlencoded for form data, though not for
files, and typically not for large strings.
Google's Picasa uses multipart/related instead of
On 8/30/2011 7:11 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 5:59 PM, Charles Pritchardch...@jumis.com wrote:
On 8/30/11 5:52 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Charles Pritchardch...@jumis.com
wrote:
On 8/24/2011 11:56 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
On
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 12:07 AM, Charles Pritchard ch...@jumis.com wrote:
On 8/30/2011 7:11 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 5:59 PM, Charles Pritchardch...@jumis.com
wrote:
On 8/30/11 5:52 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Charles
On 8/31/2011 10:19 AM, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Simple case:
var callback = function(blob) { xhr.send(blob); };
formData.toBlob(callback, 'multipart/form-data');
Several services require signed messages
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Simple case:
var callback = function(blob) { xhr.send(blob); };
formData.toBlob(callback, 'multipart/form-data');
Several services require
On 8/31/2011 10:57 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Glenn Maynardgl...@zewt.org wrote:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Jonas Sickingjo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Simple case:
var callback = function(blob) { xhr.send(blob); };
formData.toBlob(callback,
On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 21:57:59 +0200, Charles Pritchard ch...@jumis.com
wrote:
On 8/24/2011 1:33 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
Examples of such services would be useful here. (That would still
accept urlencoded files.)
A URL encoded post; that it would use a blob as the source of one of the
On 8/24/2011 11:56 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
On 8/24/11 11:36 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Charles Pritchardch...@jumis.com
wrote:
Prpoposed:
FormData output with the x-www-form-urlencoded mime type:
formData.toUrlEncodedBlob(xhr.send)
[Supplemental]
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Charles Pritchard ch...@jumis.com wrote:
On 8/24/2011 11:56 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
On 8/24/11 11:36 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Charles Pritchardch...@jumis.com
wrote:
Prpoposed:
FormData output with the
On 8/30/11 5:52 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Charles Pritchardch...@jumis.com wrote:
On 8/24/2011 11:56 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
On 8/24/11 11:36 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Charles Pritchardch...@jumis.com
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Charles Pritchard ch...@jumis.com wrote:
Prpoposed:
FormData output with the x-www-form-urlencoded mime type:
formData.toUrlEncodedBlob(xhr.send)
If going down the blob path, these two would have the same end-result:
formData.toMultipartBlob(xhr.send)
On 8/24/11 11:36 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Charles Pritchardch...@jumis.com wrote:
Prpoposed:
FormData output with the x-www-form-urlencoded mime type:
formData.toUrlEncodedBlob(xhr.send)
If going down the blob path, these two would have the same
On 8/24/2011 1:33 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 20:44:15 +0200, Charles Pritchard
ch...@jumis.com wrote:
Is there any interest in supporting application/x-www-form-urlencoded ?
It would of course lose any carried content types or file names from
Blobs. urlencoding is
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 02:25:38 +0200, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Given that this seems to be the way people prefer to do it, I'm fine
with doing that for Gecko too. But we definitely would need to get
FormData.append changed so that it supports the use case.
So the current line for
Julian Reschke also wanted to specify the mime type
El 23/08/2011 09:53, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com escribió:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 02:25:38 +0200, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc
wrote:
Given that this seems to be the way people prefer to do it, I'm fine
with doing that for Gecko too. But
2011/8/23 Alfonso Martínez de Lizarrondo aml...@gmail.com:
Julian Reschke also wanted to specify the mime type
Why? Keeping in mind that you can (and arguably should) already
specify the mimetype when you create a blob. Both BlobBuilder.getBlob
and Blob.slice lets you specify a mimetype. And
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 02:25:38 +0200, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Given that this seems to be the way people prefer to do it, I'm fine
with doing that for Gecko too. But we definitely would need to get
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 10:18:19 +0200, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Yes. Where if the filename is excluded is left out it uses the
File.name of the Blob (if the Blob is also a File), or blob (if the
Blob is not a File).
That leaves the question what to do if the filename is specified but
On 8/23/2011 3:08 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 10:18:19 +0200, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc
wrote:
Yes. Where if the filename is excluded is left out it uses the
File.name of the Blob (if the Blob is also a File), or blob (if the
Blob is not a File).
That leaves the
2011/8/23 Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com
wrote:
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 02:25:38 +0200, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc
wrote:
Given that this seems to be the way people prefer to do it, I'm fine
with doing that for Gecko
A few of us on the chrome team just discussed this. We see this as a
deficiency in the FormData interface and intend to address it by providing a
variant of FormData.append(...) that allows the caller to provide a
'filename' when appending a blob. We don't intend to implement
Given that this seems to be the way people prefer to do it, I'm fine
with doing that for Gecko too. But we definitely would need to get
FormData.append changed so that it supports the use case.
/ Jonas
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Michael Nordman micha...@google.com wrote:
A few of us on
On Monday, July 11, 2011 12:46 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
Problem is too strong a statement. I am all for trivial changes, part of my
advocacy for getFile is from past experiences when blob was less supported;
getFile would have helped.
FileReader has base64 encoding for binary data--
On 7/18/2011 12:09 PM, Adrian Bateman wrote:
On Monday, July 11, 2011 12:46 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
Problem is too strong a statement. I am all for trivial changes, part of my
advocacy for getFile is from past experiences when blob was less supported;
getFile would have helped.
FileReader
The problem is around naming the binary parts attached to
multi-part-form-encoded FormData. I think I'm in favor of the more direct
solution to this problem, providing a FormData.append() variant that
optionally allows the caller to specify a name. If no name is provided and
the blob is a File,
On Monday, July 18, 2011 12:52 PM, Michael Nordman wrote:
The problem is around naming the binary parts attached to
multi-part-form-encoded
FormData. I think I'm in favor of the more direct solution to this problem,
providing a FormData.append() variant that optionally allows the caller to
2011/7/18 Michael Nordman micha...@google.com
BlobBuilder.getFile() as a solution to this particular problem is less
direct (and less obvious and less discoverable so less friendly). And it
raises questions like... Is the blob data really flattened out as a file on
the disk somewhere? If not,
2011/7/18 Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com:
On Monday, July 11, 2011 12:46 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
Problem is too strong a statement. I am all for trivial changes, part of my
advocacy for getFile is from past experiences when blob was less supported;
getFile would have helped.
On 7/18/2011 2:42 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
If there is an API that replies on File to
work correctly we think we should fix it to work with Blob. For example,
FileReader is
really BlobReader and works fine with Blobs. To me, getFile() should be
unnecessary and
the best fix for FormData
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Charles Pritchard ch...@jumis.com wrote:
On 7/18/2011 2:42 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
If there is an API that replies on File to
work correctly we think we should fix it to work with Blob. For
example, FileReader is
really BlobReader and works fine with
On Thu, 07 Jul 2011 03:00:55 +0200, Adrian Bateman
adria...@microsoft.com wrote:
I was about to send a similar proposal. We'd prefer to add an optional
argument to append that specifies the filename. This is the smallest
change to
implementations and doesn't require developers to understand
2011/7/11 Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com:
On Thu, 07 Jul 2011 03:00:55 +0200, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com
wrote:
I was about to send a similar proposal. We'd prefer to add an optional
argument to append that specifies the filename. This is the smallest change
to
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com wrote:
On 11 July 2011 10:02, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Additionally, what is the use case of being able to set the filename
during a FormData submission? My perception was that the main use case
was to not get an empty
On 11 July 2011 10:53, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com wrote:
Some content management systems use the original filename by default
when storing files in document libraries. It's certainly a lesser use case
but seems like a
getFile could work with dataTransfer for dropping files onto the desktop. There
may be other Apis which work with File but not with Blob, or not as well with
Blob.
Blob already requires linking/abstraction from createObjectUrl. Internally,
getFile could simply run createObjectUrl and treat it
2011/7/11 Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com:
On 11 July 2011 10:53, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com
wrote:
Some content management systems use the original filename by default
when storing files in document libraries. It's
From: Charles Pritchard
Sent: 11-Jul-11 12:03 PM
To: Adrian Bateman
Cc: Jonas Sicking; Anne van Kesteren; Julian Reschke; Alfonso Martínez de
Lizarrondo; Webapps WG
Subject: Re: [XHR2] Blobs, names and FormData
getFile could work with dataTransfer for dropping files onto the desktop
Subject: Re: [XHR2] Blobs, names and FormData
getFile could work with dataTransfer for dropping files onto the desktop.
There may be other Apis which work with File but not with Blob, or not as
well with Blob.
Blob already requires linking/abstraction from createObjectUrl. Internally,
getFile
Just catching up with this thread. We ran into the same problem last week while
investigating FormData and XHR. Since FormData is designed to allow XHR to
interact
with existing form end-points that usually required a navigation, we've found
that
few of them have been tested with empty
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 20:17:52 +0200, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Just a small nit: We would also use blob for File objects with an
empty .name property, right?
Done: http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/XMLHttpRequest-2/#dom-formdata-append
--
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
On 2011-06-29 18:34, Alfonso Martínez de Lizarrondo wrote:
...
No.
All I want is a way for the web page to state that when a Blob is used
in a FormData object it should be send to the server with a proposed
filename. No sniffing. No guessing. It's up to the script to suggest a
correct filename
I thought that the browser could retrieve that info from the os based on the
proposed extension.
I just requested the part that I needed, if there's something else missing
then I guess that it should be possible to add it at the same time.
El 30/06/2011 09:28, Julian Reschke julian.resc...@gmx.de
On 2011-06-30 09:54, Alfonso Martínez de Lizarrondo wrote:
I thought that the browser could retrieve that info from the os based on
the proposed extension.
1) the OS may not know
2) it also needs to be sent over the wire some way...
I just requested the part that I needed, if there's
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 20:17:52 +0200, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Just a small nit: We would also use blob for File objects with an
empty .name property, right?
I guess we can do that. getFile() should also specify a media type by the
way.
--
Anne van Kesteren
I didn't notice this thread and I filed [1] in webkit due to this behavior.
Providing an automatic filename it's better than sending an empty one, but
it fails to address interaction with existing systems (some might refuse the
upload if it doesn't look like a correct file type, at the very least
On Wednesday, June 29, 2011, Alfonso Martínez de Lizarrondo
aml...@gmail.com wrote:
I didn't notice this thread and I filed [1] in webkit due to this behavior.
Providing an automatic filename it's better than sending an empty one, but it
fails to address interaction with existing systems (some
2011/6/29 Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc
On Wednesday, June 29, 2011, Alfonso Martínez de Lizarrondo
aml...@gmail.com wrote:
I didn't notice this thread and I filed [1] in webkit due to this
behavior.
Providing an automatic filename it's better than sending an empty one,
but it fails to
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 16:43:13 +0200, Alfonso Martínez de Lizarrondo
aml...@gmail.com wrote:
Providing an automatic filename it's better than sending an empty one,
but it fails to address interaction with existing systems (some might
refuse the upload if it doesn't look like a correct file
2011/6/29 Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 16:43:13 +0200, Alfonso Martínez de Lizarrondo
aml...@gmail.com wrote:
Providing an automatic filename it's better than sending an empty one, but
it fails to address interaction with existing systems (some might refuse the
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:21:39 +0200, Alfonso Martínez de Lizarrondo
aml...@gmail.com wrote:
If a png screenshot (as provided by current Chrome in the paste event) is
sent to the server and saved as blob.bin or blob.blob, I doubt that
it will be sent back to the client with the correct mime
2011/6/29 Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:21:39 +0200, Alfonso Martínez de Lizarrondo
aml...@gmail.com wrote:
If a png screenshot (as provided by current Chrome in the paste event) is
sent to the server and saved as blob.bin or blob.blob, I doubt that it
will be
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:34:58 +0200, Alfonso Martínez de Lizarrondo
aml...@gmail.com wrote:
My first simple approach was:
formdata.append(elementName, blob, picture.png);
Jonas has suggested instead
blobbuilder.getFile(picture.png)
I don't mind one way or another, or something else you think
2011/6/29 Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:34:58 +0200, Alfonso Martínez de Lizarrondo
aml...@gmail.com wrote:
My first simple approach was:
formdata.append(elementName, blob, picture.png);
Jonas has suggested instead
blobbuilder.getFile(picture.png)
I don't
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Friday, June 17, 2011, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 23:52:21 +0200, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
When a Blob is appended to a FormData, the XHR2 spec currently says
that the
On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 23:52:21 +0200, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
When a Blob is appended to a FormData, the XHR2 spec currently says
that the filename used should be the empty string unless the Blob is
also a File. If such a FormData is later submitted using
XMLHttpRequest, this will
On Friday, June 17, 2011, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 23:52:21 +0200, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
When a Blob is appended to a FormData, the XHR2 spec currently says
that the filename used should be the empty string unless the Blob is
also a File.
Hi All,
When a Blob is appended to a FormData, the XHR2 spec currently says
that the filename used should be the empty string unless the Blob is
also a File. If such a FormData is later submitted using
XMLHttpRequest, this will result in a request that contains something
similar to:
59 matches
Mail list logo
