If you could do that before, it was probably a bug :) (You shouldn't be able to use getParent on the filesystem root, and the native code was supposed to be checking for the correct path prefix before allowing access to any files on the device)
At the moment, it's not possible to do that -- the filesystems should be properly isolated, and only allow access to correctly formed urls, like filesystem://localhost/persistent/some-file-here.txt. What we *can* do easily, though, is allow a new URL scheme for library assets; something like filesystem://localhost/library/some-file-here.txt, and we can have a filesystem handler for those URLs. That'll work if your use case is just "I need access to files in /Library", rather than "I need to get to them via string manipulation". I've also had some discussions about making /Library the default place for the persistent filesystem, and leaving /Documents either just for legacy apps, or making *that* the target of the special URL scheme. That's a proposal for a different day, though. There are some pretty big backwards-compatibility issues there. On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Michael Gauthier <m...@silverorange.com>wrote: > Ian, > > With the new URLs will it be possible to write to both /Documents and > /Library for iOS apps? In the old version, the filesystem root resolved as > /Documents but it was possible to get to /Library by navigating the the > parent dir. > > Cheers, > Mike > > > > On 2013-11-15 15:19, Ian Clelland wrote: > >> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 1:40 PM, purplecabbage <purplecabb...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> Considering the magnitude of the changes I would have expected that this >>> was just a new file plugin. The previous version was based on a spec, and >>> if we are deviating from it we should probably maintain both, and >>> possibly >>> even make a recommendation to the w3c. >>> I hope we at least do a major version update for this if APIs have >>> changed. >>> >>> >> Yes, definitely a major version bump, at least so that devs aren't caught >> by the URL-format-change. >> >> There aren't any changes to external APIs; I've been very careful to >> maintain conformance with the existing tests, except where those tests >> have >> been for undocumented implementation details. The only app-visible change >> is that URLs returned by the .toURL() method will look like >> >> filesystem://localhost/persistent/my/file.jpg >> >> rather than >> >> file:///var/mobile/Applications/<app id>/Documents/my/file.jpg >> >> We are still following the spec -- in fact, this brings us closer in line >> with the W3C File API spec, on these points: >> >> http://www.w3.org/TR/file-system-api/#widl-Entry-fullPath -- The fullPath >> of an entry should be the path from the root (of the HTML filesystem, not >> the underlying device file system). >> >> http://www.w3.org/TR/file-system-api/#widl-Entry-toURL-DOMString -- This >> is >> a note, rather than a requirement, but a filesystem url scheme is >> mentioned >> there. >> >> We're considering extending the spec in one way, which should be >> compatible >> with the spirit of the spec, and backwards-compatible with the previous >> API. That is the ability to declare new filesystem types, beyond >> "temporary" and "persistent", so that we can access things like device >> media and app bundle assets using the same APIs that we use for accessing >> user-defined files. If we're happy with the way that works, then we should >> definitely propose it for inclusion in the standard (not the specific >> filesystems, perhaps, but the mechanism for requesting and interacting >> with >> them) >> >> Ian >> >> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On Nov 15, 2013, at 8:36 AM, Ian Clelland <iclell...@chromium.org> >>>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> I've created CB-5403 as the über-ticket for this; various bits of it are >>>> >>> in >>> >>>> subtasks. >>>> >>>> Once I have the tests and the JS updated, then platform owners can take >>>> a >>>> look and see whether they have anything to do to support their own >>>> >>> schemes. >>> >>>> >>>> As general guidelines, I would say: >>>> >>>> * If you can intercept filesystem://* URLs in native code, and return >>>> arbitrary responses, then do it! It will let your platform support new >>>> filesystems in the future as we come up with them. Add a couple of >>>> >>> subtasks >>> >>>> for CB-5403 for your platform and go. >>>> >>>> * If you can't do that, but you *can* provide access to things like >>>> media >>>> through special urls, then try that! You should be able to create a >>>> FileSystem object that uses that URL as its root, and everything should >>>> work. Add a subtask for that, and see what you can do. >>>> >>>> * If you can't do that either, and you just want to stick with the >>>> >>> file:/// >>> >>>> urls that we are currently using, then don't do anything; nothing should >>>> change for you. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Ian Clelland <iclell...@chromium.org >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 10:03 AM, Marcel Kinard <cmarc...@gmail.com >>>>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Ian, will there be changes that app developers will need to do? If so, >>>>>> those should be clearly documented in a migration guide. If not, it >>>>>> >>>>> sounds >>> >>>> like the [improved] tests should pass on both the old and new versions, >>>>>> which would be sweet. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The filesystem URLs themselves will change as a result of this. The >>>>> >>>> tests >>> >>>> should pass on both old and new versions, but the tests mint their own >>>>> >>>> URLs >>> >>>> for testing against -- each version is internally consistent, but if an >>>>> >>>> app >>> >>>> is saving internal URLs and tries to dereference an old (file:///) url >>>>> >>>> with >>> >>>> the new plugin, it will probably not resolve. >>>>> >>>>> Maybe there's a transition path here -- it might be possible to allow >>>>> window.resolveLocalFileSystemURL to access files with the old URL, but >>>>> never actually generate URLs. >>>>> >>>>> That would mean that >>>>> >>>>> (resolveLocalFileSystemURL(a)).toURL() !== a, >>>>> >>>>> but I don't think that we depend on that as an identity. >>>>> >>>>> Is there work which needs to be done on the other platforms (BB, WP8, >>>>> >>>>>> Win8, FFOS, etc) so that those platforms don't get left behind? If so, >>>>>> would it make sense to reach out to those platform owners and at least >>>>>> >>>>> get >>> >>>> Jira items created with some notes? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yes. I'm going to create a ticket for this, and we can add >>>>> platform-specific tasks to it. >>>>> >>>>> Other platforms shouldn't *have* to do anything, and some platforms >>>>> *can't* do anything, because they cannot access anything other than >>>>> file:/// urls anyway. >>>>> >>>>> However, if the other platforms want to get in on the goodness, and >>>>> >>>> start >>> >>>> supporting their own URL schemes (I think the BB folks can use something >>>>> like local:// for their filesystem access), then that'll be the place >>>>> to >>>>> keep everything organized. >>>>> >>>>> I'll post back once I have that issue set up. >>>>> >>>>> Ian >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sounds like you've built some very significant improvements. Thanks! >>>>>> >>>>>> On Nov 15, 2013, at 9:29 AM, Ian Clelland <iclell...@chromium.org> >>>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>>>> After working with the File plugin for a week or so, I've gotten it >>>>>>> >>>>>> more or >>>>>> >>>>>>> less where I want it to be on iOS, and am working through Android. >>>>>>> >>>>>> Looking >>>>>> >>>>>>> at the end result, though, I expect that over 90% of the code has >>>>>>> been >>>>>>> touched in some way. (It's a huge diff.) >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >> >
