[whatwg] ArrayBuffer and ByteArray questions
simonp at opera.com
Wed Sep 8 09:44:00 PDT 2010
On Wed, 08 Sep 2010 17:22:44 +0200, Chris Marrin <cmarrin at apple.com> wrote:
> On Sep 8, 2010, at 12:13 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> On Wed, 08 Sep 2010 01:09:13 +0200, Jian Li <jianli at chromium.org> wrote:
>>> Several specs, like File API and WebGL, use ArrayBuffer, while other
>>> spec, like XMLHttpRequest Level 2, use ByteArray. Should we change to
>>> use the same name all across our specs? Since we define ArrayBuffer in
>>> the Typed Arrays spec (
>>> should we favor ArrayBuffer?
>>> In addition, can we consider adding ArrayBuffer support to BlobBuilder,
>>> FormData, and XMLHttpRequest.send()?
>> So TC39 is going to leave this thing alone? I.e. are we sure
>> ArrayBuffer is the way of the future?
> ArrayBuffer certainly has momentum behind it. It started as a part of
> the WebGL spec as a way of passing buffers of data of various types
> (sometimes heterogeneous types) to the WebGL engine. Since then, it has
> found uses in the Web Audio proposal, the File API and there has been
> talk in using it as a way to pass data to Web Workers.
Do you mean WebSockets?
> We have discussed using it in XHR as well, and I think that would be a
> great idea. From a WebGL standpoint, it is the one missing piece to make
> it possible to easily get data of any type from a URL into the WebGL
> engine. But it would have uses in many other places as well.
> For reference, here is the latest proposal:
> cmarrin at apple.com
More information about the whatwg