On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:59 AM, Robin Berjon ro...@berjon.com wrote:
Hi all,
with the likes of postMessage and Web Intents that we are getting access to
now, it is increasingly common that data may flow from a server to an
in-browser page, that may then pass that data on to another
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Wed, 1 Aug 2012, Glenn Adams wrote:
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 Thu, 2 Aug 2012, Glenn Adams wrote:
I don't really care about the XHR side of this (happy to let Anne
figure that out), but since WebSockets was mentioned: what's the use
case that involves Web Socket? I don't really understand what problem
we're trying to solve here.
i would
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 1:04 AM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012, Glenn Adams wrote:
I don't really care about the XHR side of this (happy to let Anne
figure that out), but since WebSockets was mentioned: what's the use
case that involves Web Socket? I don't really
On Aug 1, 2012, at 21:26 , Glenn Adams wrote:
So? Why should lazy blob be specific to HTTP specific semantics when an
arbitrary URL is not specific to HTTP?
No one said that they would have to be HTTP specific, but I agree with Florian
that I don't see how it could apply to WS. It could, for
On Aug 1, 2012, at 22:13 , Glenn Adams wrote:
The subject line says Lazy Blob, not Lazy Blob and XHR. For the record, I
will object to a LazyBlob solution that is tied solely to XHR, so deal with
it now rather than later.
Objections need to be built on something — just objecting for the fun
On 8/1/12 10:04 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
Can we please stop saying lazy blob? It's a confused and confusing
phrase. Blobs are lazy by design.
Yes. Remote blob is more accurate and should help think about this
problem in a more meaningful way.
--tobie
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 10:45:03 +0200, Tobie Langel to...@fb.com wrote:
On 8/1/12 10:04 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
Can we please stop saying lazy blob? It's a confused and confusing
phrase. Blobs are lazy by design.
Yes. Remote blob is more accurate and should help think about
On Aug 2, 2012, at 10:45 , Tobie Langel wrote:
On 8/1/12 10:04 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
Can we please stop saying lazy blob? It's a confused and confusing
phrase. Blobs are lazy by design.
Yes. Remote blob is more accurate and should help think about this
problem in a more
Hi Glenn and all,
From: Glenn Maynard [mailto:gl...@zewt.org]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2012 12:45 AM
To: Robin Berjon
Cc: WebApps WG; Jungkee Song
Subject: Re: Lazy Blob
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Robin Berjon ro...@berjon.com wrote:
var bb = new BlobBuilder()
, blob =
On 8/2/12 2:29 PM, Robin Berjon ro...@berjon.com wrote:
On Aug 2, 2012, at 10:45 , Tobie Langel wrote:
On 8/1/12 10:04 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
Can we please stop saying lazy blob? It's a confused and confusing
phrase. Blobs are lazy by design.
Yes. Remote blob is more
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 2:36 AM, Robin Berjon ro...@berjon.com wrote:
On Aug 1, 2012, at 22:13 , Glenn Adams wrote:
The subject line says Lazy Blob, not Lazy Blob and XHR. For the record,
I will object to a LazyBlob solution that is tied solely to XHR, so deal
with it now rather than later.
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 9:51 AM, Florian Bösch pya...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
No it hasn't. If you want a real world use case it is this: my
architectural constraints as an author for some particular usage requires
that I use WS
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 10:04 AM, Florian Bösch pya...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
All WS usage requires a particular (application specific) implementation
on the server, does it not? Notwithstanding that fact, such usage will fall
into
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012, Glenn Adams wrote:
Sorry, I was vague. What I mean is what user-facing problem is it that
we're trying to solve?
see DAR's initial message in this thread; bringing WS into scope doesn't
change the problem statement, it merely enlarges the solution space, or
keeps
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012, Glenn Adams wrote:
Sorry, I was vague. What I mean is what user-facing problem is it that
we're trying to solve?
see DAR's initial message in this thread; bringing WS into scope doesn't
change
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012, Glenn Adams wrote:
I was referring to
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012JulSep/0264.html
While that message does not specifically refer to a full-duplex comm
path, it states the general problem in terms of It is increasingly
common that data may
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Florian Bösch pya...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
I am not proposing a particular browser supported semantic for a
specific implementation on the server. I have suggested, by way of
example, two
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012, Glenn Adams wrote:
I was referring to
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012JulSep/0264.html
While that message does not specifically refer to a full-duplex comm
path, it states the
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012, Glenn Adams wrote:
Are you asking for use cases for a remote/lazy blob in general? i.e., as
would apply to the proposed XHR usage and any other underlying supported
data source? or are you asking about high level use cases that are
particular to a WS binding but not an
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012, Glenn Adams wrote:
Are you asking for use cases for a remote/lazy blob in general? i.e., as
would apply to the proposed XHR usage and any other underlying supported
data source? or are you asking about
I'd suggest the following.
- Introduce an interface URLObject (bikeshedding can come later), with no
methods. This object is supported by structured clone.
- Add XMLHttpRequest.getURLObject(optional data), which returns a new
URLObject. This can only be called while XMLHttpRequest is in the
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 9:50 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
Further, a default behavior in the absence of such an injection might be
defined simply to read data from the WS and stuff into the blob.
Which kind of defeats the purpose because you wanted to read ranges, so not
a whole
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 6:51 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
I'm questioning defining a LazyBlob that is solely usable with XHR. It
would be better to have a more generic version IMO.
Websockets have no content semantics, therefore any lazy content
negotiating reader cannot deal with
I like IndexedDB and non-relational databases. One feature that is very
useful is the ability to search by regular expression:
http://www.mongodb.org/display/DOCS/Advanced+Queries#AdvancedQueries-RegularExpressions
By not having this feature, I can't port my application to IndexedDB from
WebSQL
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 6:40 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
Why restrict to XHR? How about WebSocket as data source?
Websockets support array buffers and therefore by extension any blob/file
object. However as a stream oriented API websockets have no content
aquisition, negotation,
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
No it hasn't. If you want a real world use case it is this: my
architectural constraints as an author for some particular usage requires
that I use WS rather than XHR. I wish to have support for the construct
being discussed
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
I am not proposing a particular browser supported semantic for a
specific implementation on the server. I have suggested, by way of
example, two particular patterns be supported independently of any such
implementation. I did
I'm interested in drawing tablets and I wonder how that might appear in
browsers.
Typically drawing tablets have these properties:
- PenID: The current pen ID being used
- Tool type: the classification of the pen
- Proximity: in range of the magnet-resonance sensors
- Distance: distance over the
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
So? Why should lazy blob be specific to HTTP specific semantics when an
arbitrary URL is not specific to HTTP?
Reading a resource at arbitrary locations requires two things:
1) That a resource is understood as a container of
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
All WS usage requires a particular (application specific) implementation
on the server, does it not? Notwithstanding that fact, such usage will fall
into certain messaging patterns. I happened to give an example of two
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 10:13 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
The subject line says Lazy Blob, not Lazy Blob and XHR. For the record, I
will object to a LazyBlob solution that is tied solely to XHR, so deal with
it now rather than later.
Then you better get onto specifying a
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
blob =
bb.getBlobFromURL(ws://specifiction.com/image/kitten.pnghttp://specifiction.com/kitten.png
)
There is no application layer transfer protocol inherent in websockets.
Requesting a resource does not have any inherent
I'm interested in drawing tablets and I wonder how that might appear in
browsers.
Typically drawing tablets have these properties:
- PenID: The current pen ID being used
- Tool type: the classification of the pen
- Proximity: in range of the magnet-resonance sensors
- Distance: distance over the
The URLObject proposal is a pretty slick way of cooking up a request in
contextA for later (and all manner of) retrieval in contextB.
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Glenn Maynard gl...@zewt.org wrote:
I'd suggest the following.
- Introduce an interface URLObject (bikeshedding can come
35 matches
Mail list logo
