incubator-callback-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Filip Maj <>
Subject Re: FileTransfer vs XHR2 - Should we keep improving FileTransfer?
Date Thu, 26 Jul 2012 17:43:56 GMT
As much as I would like to see it gone, it is a necessity at this point.
How to upload binary files, for example? Need to make sure we cover our
users' core use cases, binary upload being one of them.

Agree with Jesse that would also need to see the viability of moving to
xhr2 across our supported platforms.

I am leaning towards keeping it around for now (maybe discussing a
deprecation plan, and how to replace it with other structs), but would
love to see it gone. What would we need to do to get rid of it long-term?

On 7/26/12 10:17 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen" <> wrote:

>I don't see polyfillin this as an easy feat.
>How can we implement ArrayBuffer?
>Also, without web workers, file transfers would block the ui thread,
>or am I missing something?
>I think we need to go a little further into the 'how' before we can
>see if it makes sense.
>Personally I think there will always be a place for the FileTransfer
>API as it is simple and dedicated.
>  Jesse
>On 2012-07-26, at 9:42 AM, Joe Bowser <> wrote:
>> Hey
>> There are a lot of requests to improve file transfer to support
>> multiple files, and have the same header format on upload and
>> download.  I know that Andrew has been doing work on it, but I want to
>> know if we should take on the multiple file ticket (CB-200), or if
>> we're going to deprecate this and go with XHR2 for our File
>> Upload/Download needs.  I'm assuming moving to XHR2 will require
>> polyfilling it on Android 2.x, which is fine, but I kind of want to
>> see some movement on this, since I don't want to give people this as a
>> First Ticket just to have it deprecated.
>> Thoughts?
>> Joe

View raw message