Closed
Bug 527370
Opened 16 years ago
Closed 16 years ago
Rename objects/properties to match File API spec
Categories
(Core :: DOM: Core & HTML, defect, P2)
Core
DOM: Core & HTML
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla1.9.2
| Tracking | Status | |
|---|---|---|
| status1.9.2 | --- | beta4-fixed |
People
(Reporter: sicking, Assigned: sicking)
References
Details
(Keywords: dev-doc-complete)
Attachments
(2 files, 1 obsolete file)
|
39.84 KB,
patch
|
smaug
:
review+
jst
:
superreview+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
|
9.32 KB,
patch
|
jst
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
There are two naming differences between our file api implementation and the latest spec drafts: The FileRequest object in our implementation is called FileReader in the spec, and the .response property is called .result.
The attached patch fixes both of these.
I should note that there should be no cause for concern that the spec will change significantly any further. We knew that these names might change when we did the initial landing, and since these names have been proposed to the WG, no dissenting feedback has been received.
The controversial parts of the spec are parts that we don't yet implement (intentionally).
Note, I didn't change the iid for the interface since it's binary compatible with the old interface.
Don't know if this qualifies as an interface change or not, but I asked for sr just in case.
Flags: blocking1.9.2?
Attachment #411091 -
Flags: superreview?(jst)
Attachment #411091 -
Flags: review?(Olli.Pettay)
| Assignee | ||
Comment 1•16 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 411091 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch to fix
On second thought, sr seems excessive for something that is a search'n'replace patch.
Attachment #411091 -
Flags: superreview?(jst)
Updated•16 years ago
|
Attachment #411091 -
Flags: review?(Olli.Pettay) → review+
Comment 2•16 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 411091 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch to fix
Do we want this change to 1.9.2? Then sr would be good.
Comment 3•16 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #0)
> Note, I didn't change the iid for the interface since it's binary compatible
> with the old interface.
I don't understand this. You do change the interface name and its iid.
And what is binary compatible with what?
Comment 4•16 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 411091 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch to fix
sr=jst, and yeah, the IID did change. I'm fine either way though, since the new interface is binary compatible with the old one in this case.
Attachment #411091 -
Flags: superreview+
| Assignee | ||
Comment 5•16 years ago
|
||
Hrm.. I guess I forgot to rediff after revierting the iid change.
Though it doesn't make much of a practical difference because the contract and CID changed, so binary compat is broken there anyway. So I'll keep the iid change since that's what got reviewed.
| Assignee | ||
Updated•16 years ago
|
Attachment #411091 -
Flags: approval1.9.2?
| Assignee | ||
Comment 6•16 years ago
|
||
Checked in to trunk
http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/85dc46c47d7f
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 16 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Comment 7•16 years ago
|
||
Let's get this in for 1.9.2 so developers don't need to fight this any longer than necessary.
Flags: blocking1.9.2? → blocking1.9.2+
Priority: -- → P2
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla1.9.2
Updated•16 years ago
|
Attachment #411091 -
Flags: approval1.9.2?
Comment 8•16 years ago
|
||
Jonas, can you land this on 1.9.2 asap?
Updated•16 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → jonas
| Assignee | ||
Comment 9•16 years ago
|
||
Attachment #412743 -
Flags: review?(jst)
| Assignee | ||
Comment 10•16 years ago
|
||
Fix error in test
Attachment #412743 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #412744 -
Flags: review?(jst)
Attachment #412743 -
Flags: review?(jst)
Updated•16 years ago
|
Attachment #412744 -
Flags: review?(jst) → review+
| Assignee | ||
Comment 11•16 years ago
|
||
Pushed second fix to trunk:
http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/a0c008161bd3
Updated•16 years ago
|
Keywords: dev-doc-needed
| Assignee | ||
Comment 13•16 years ago
|
||
This was fixed on the 1.9.2 branch as well on monday:
http://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-1.9.2/rev/2ff5b2bbc4d8
http://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-1.9.2/rev/8bc9eba781ea
http://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-1.9.2/rev/13cf65d3c6c7
status1.9.2:
--- → final-fixed
Comment 14•16 years ago
|
||
Is there a bug for remaining differences between our implementation and the spec? For instance, our implementation of FileException has totally different values than the spec's.
Comment 15•16 years ago
|
||
For FileException: Bug 530212
For FileError: Bug 530210
Comment 16•16 years ago
|
||
Documentation has been added. There are a few tweaks that will happen to add links to blog posts Paul is working on, but it's essentially done.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Using_files_from_web_applications
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/DOM/FileList
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/DOM/File
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/DOM/FileReader
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/DOM/FileError
Keywords: dev-doc-needed → dev-doc-complete
Updated•6 years ago
|
Component: DOM → DOM: Core & HTML
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•