Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cordova.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cordova.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of iclelland@google.com designates
 209.85.214.178 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: iclelland@google.com
In-Reply-To: 
 <5900F9BCB827854FB01CA94BA718810D1E73DE7E@USPHLEMB11A.global.corp.sap>
References: 
 <CAK_TSXKZd+NWjzDdJfigNs35P7kNCym+6GnFTC75vTYVOOpJUg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADVgkyNDHQU9aOBWpFB1wOf9HnaXuzWjTQyVS7kfUDddz3oH2w@mail.gmail.com>
 <5900F9BCB827854FB01CA94BA718810D1E73DE7E@USPHLEMB11A.global.corp.sap>
From: Ian Clelland <iclelland@chromium.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 15:16:27 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CAK_TSXLkwPth9Nr6nTKLJNsOMcq8f1MePaaAXShON9NSuiyJ7A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Updating FileTransfer
To: "dev@cordova.apache.org" <dev@cordova.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e011846889e918604ebc9b1f8

--089e011846889e918604ebc9b1f8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 3:12 PM, Wargo, John <john.wargo@sap.com> wrote:

> Brian,
>
> Nope to which part of his question? I thought the File API was an
> implementation  of the W3C File API?  Even the File API docs page begins
> with:
>

The question was about FIleTransfer, not File -- and I think that the nope
was to the published spec side of the disjunction. (But I'll let Brian
clarify if I'm wrong)

As far as I can tell, there isn't a FileTransfer.upload /
FileTransfer.download API anywhere else that's quite like the Cordova API.

Ian


>
> "An API to read, write and navigate file system hierarchies, based on the
> w3c file api."
>
> John M. Wargo
> Twitter: @johnwargo
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: brian.leroux@gmail.com [mailto:brian.leroux@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Brian LeRoux
> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 5:11 PM
> To: dev@cordova.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Updating FileTransfer
>
> Answers inline.
>
>
> > Does FileTransfer implement any published standard, or is it our own API?
> >
> > Nope.
>
>
>
> > Does it make sense for FileTransfer to continue to use raw FileSystem
> paths
> > (and *not* go through File at all?) given that the File API will soon be
> > returning only relative paths and filesystem:// URLs.
> >
> > Consistent w/ URL scheme makes sense to me but I'll let others chime in
> how this will break everything and our users will hate us. But remember:
> plugins are versioned!
>

--089e011846889e918604ebc9b1f8--