On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 5:56 PM, David Levin <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 5:42 PM, Adam Barth <[email protected]> wrote: >> What do you think of the idea of having a re-useable BlobCore module >> that all the ports can share? > > I don't think this is a good idea. This "re-usable module" would only be > used by the Safari WebKit port. As I understand it, Chromium wouldn't be > able to re-use it due to not re-using WebKit types in general. With only one > port using it, the module seems like it would not be able to have a good > design. > > So if there is a change, it seems better to just write it for the Safari > WebKit port and as other ports want to implement it, if they find > commonality, it would be in their best interest to refractor the existing > code for better re-use.
Would Chromium be able to re-use the code if it were part of WebCore? I guess I don't understand what's different about those two cases. Another question, does this design allow blob URLs to be used by the <video> element? My understanding is that <video> bypasses ResourceHandle because ResourceHandle isn't smart enough to handle range requests (or something like that). Adam _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
