[whatwg] File API Streaming Blobs
simon at simonheckmann.de
Mon Aug 8 13:31:29 PDT 2011
Well, not directly an answer to your question, but the use case I had in mind is the following:
A large encrypted video (e.g. HD movie with 2GB) file is stored using the File API, I then want to decrypt this file and start playing with only a minor delay. I do not want to decrypt the entire file before it can be viewed. As long as such as use case gets covered I am fine with everything.
Am 08.08.2011 um 22:17 schrieb Eric U <ericu at google.com>:
> Sorry about the very slow response; I've been on leave, and am now
> catching up on my email.
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Arun Ranganathan <arun at mozilla.com> wrote:
>> Greetings Adam,
>>> Ian, I wish I knew that earlier when I originally posted the idea,
>>> there was lots of discussion and good ideas but then it suddenly
>>> dropped of the face of the earth. Essentially I am fowarding this
>>> suggestion to public-webapps at w3.org on the basis as apparently most
>>> discussion of File API specs happen there, and would like to know how
>>> to move forward with this suggestion.
>>> The original suggestion and following comments are on the whatwg list
>>> archive, starting with
>>> Summing up, the problem with the current implementation of Blobs is
>>> that once a URI has been generated for them, by design changes are no
>>> longer reflected in the object URL. In a streaming scenario, this is
>>> not what is needed, rather a long-living Blob that can be appended is
>>> needed and 'streamed' to other parts of the browser, e.g. the<video>
>>> or<audio> element.
>>> The original use case was: make an application which will download
>>> media files from a server and cache them locally, as well as playing
>>> them without making the user wait for the entire file to be
>>> downloaded, converted to a blob, then saved and played, however such
>>> an API covers many other use cases such as on-the-fly on-device
>>> decryption of streamed media content (ie live streams either without
>>> end or static large files that to download completely would be a waste
>>> when only the first couple of seconds need to be buffered and
>>> decrypted before playback can begin)
>>> Some suggestions were to modify or create a new type of Blob, the
>>> StreamingBlob which can be changed without its object url changing and
>>> appended to as new data is downloaded or decoded, and using a similar
>>> process to how large files may start to be decoded/played by a browser
>>> before they are fully downloaded. Other suggestions suggested using a
>>> pull API on the Blob so browsers can request for new data
>>> asynchronously, such as in
>>> Some problems however that a browser may face is what to do with urls
>>> which are opened twice, and whether the object url should start from
>>> the beginning (which would be needed for decoding encrypted, on-demand
>>> audio) or start from the end (similar to `tail`, for live streaming
>>> events that need decryption, etc.).
>>> P.S. Sorry if I've not done this the right way by forwarding like
>>> this, I'm not usually active on mailing lists.
>> I actually think moving to a streaming mode for file reads in general is
>> desirable, but I'm not entirely sure extending Blobs is the way to go for
>> *that* use case, which honestly is the main use case I'm interested in. We
>> may improve upon ideas after this API goes to Last Call for streaming file
>> there :) . Blob objects as they are currently specified live "in memory"
>> and represent "in memory" File objects as well. A change to the underlying
>> file isn't captured in the Blob snapshot; moreover, if the file moves or is
>> no longer present at time of read, an error event is fired while processing
>> a read operation. The object URL may be dereferenced, but will result in a
>> The Streaming API explored by WHATWG uses the Object URL scheme for
>> videoconferencing use cases , and so the scheme itself is suitable for
>> "resources" that are more dynamic than memory-resident Blob objects.
>> Segment-plays/segment dereferencing in general can be handled through media
>> fragments; the scheme can naturally be accompanied by fragment identifiers.
>> I agree that it may be desirable to extend Blobs to do a few other things in
>> general, maybe independent of better file reads. You've Cc'd the right
>> listserv :) I'd be interested in what Eric has to say, since BlobBuilder
>> evolves under his watch.
> Having reviewed the threads, I'm not absolutely sure that we want to
> add this stuff to Blob. It seems like streaming is quite a bit
> different than a lot of the problems people want to solve with Blobs,
> and we may end up with a bit of a mess if we mash them together.
> BlobBuilder does seem a decent match as a StreamBuilder, though.
> Since Blobs are specifically non-mutable, it sounds like what you're
> looking for is more like createObjectURL(blobBuilder) than
> From the threads and from my head, here are some questions:
> 1) Would reading from a stream always start at the beginning, or would
> it start at the "current" point [e.g. in a live video stream]?
> 2) Would this have to support infinite streams?
> 3) Would we be expected to keep around data from the very beginning of
> a stream, even if e.g. it's a live broadcast and you're now watching
> hour 7? If not, who controls the buffer size and what's the API for
> data lifetime?
> 4) Should there be a way to get a stream from XHR directly? [It's
> probably not sufficient for all uses or necessary for any.]
> 5) Do we want a pull API such as Glenn suggests at
> instead of using BlobBuilder at all?
> I haven't fully absorbed the MediaStream API, but perhaps it would be
> more natural to make a connector in that API rather than modifying
>> -- A*
>>  http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#stream-api
More information about the whatwg