Re: Blob/File naming
1. Most people that I talk to dislike the name Blob, much less having it spread to things like BlobReader. I could maybe understand this if blob were a new term we were inventing. But it's not. It's a well-known computer science concept. It seems worse to try and coin a totally new name for opaque chunk of data. FWIW, most people hating the name blob seems like a stretch, as it has not been my experience. But maybe we run in different circles.
RE: Blob/File naming
On Tuesday, September 07, 2010 11:46 AM, Chris Prince wrote: 1. Most people that I talk to dislike the name Blob, much less having it spread to things like BlobReader. I could maybe understand this if blob were a new term we were inventing. But it's not. It's a well-known computer science concept. It seems worse to try and coin a totally new name for opaque chunk of data. FWIW, most people hating the name blob seems like a stretch, as it has not been my experience. But maybe we run in different circles. This was addressed to me although quoting Jonas. One of the problems I've experienced is that in general the well-known computer science concept doesn't have a URL that can be used to stream data into another object. It's feasible to use the Blob interface in circumstances where the bits of the blob aren't manifested until they are actually used. Some concepts from the Media Capture API seem to be heading in this direction. That said, I don't have a problem with the name Blob. :o) Cheers, Adrian.
Re: Blob/File naming
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Chris Prince chris.pri...@gmail.com wrote: 1. Most people that I talk to dislike the name Blob, much less having it spread to things like BlobReader. I could maybe understand this if blob were a new term we were inventing. But it's not. It's a well-known computer science concept. It seems worse to try and coin a totally new name for opaque chunk of data. FWIW, most people hating the name blob seems like a stretch, as it has not been my experience. But maybe we run in different circles. I have already enumerated in numerous emails why I think File is better than Blob, at least in some contexts. Last time in [1]. You seem to have a different experience with regards to item 1 in that list, however items 2 through 4 still applies and so I don't see a reason to change my conclusion. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010JulSep/0637.html / Jonas
Re: Blob/File naming
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.comwrote: On Tuesday, September 07, 2010 11:46 AM, Chris Prince wrote: 1. Most people that I talk to dislike the name Blob, much less having it spread to things like BlobReader. I could maybe understand this if blob were a new term we were inventing. But it's not. It's a well-known computer science concept. It seems worse to try and coin a totally new name for opaque chunk of data. FWIW, most people hating the name blob seems like a stretch, as it has not been my experience. But maybe we run in different circles. This was addressed to me although quoting Jonas. One of the problems I've experienced is that in general the well-known computer science concept doesn't have a URL that can be used to stream data into another object. It's feasible to use the Blob interface in circumstances where the bits of the blob aren't manifested until they are actually used. Some concepts from the Media Capture API seem to be heading in this direction. We've reformed the api that provides a url such that it's no longer an attribute of the Blob instance. Instead there's a method of the window' that binds the contents of the Blob to a url that is valid for the lifetime of the window object or until the url is revoked via another window method. That said, I don't have a problem with the name Blob. :o) Me neither. Cheers, Adrian.
