design-reviews#359: Additional reading methods on Blob and File

#359: Additional reading methods on Blob and File

Visit on Github.

Opened Mar 26, 2019

Góðan dag TAG！

I'm requesting a TAG review of:

Name: "Modern" reading API for Blob and File similar to Fetch's Body mixin
Specification URL: https://github.com/w3c/FileAPI/pull/117
Explainer, Requirements Doc, or Example code: [url]
Tests: In progress in https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/15984
Primary contacts: @mkruisselbrink

Further details (optional):

Relevant time constraints or deadlines: We're currently implementing this in Chrome and hope to ship this soon
I have read and filled out the Self-Review Questionnare on Security and Privacy. N/A, feature doesn't add any new functionality.
I have reviewed the TAG's API Design Principles

You should also know that...

[please tell us anything you think is relevant to this review]

We'd prefer the TAG provide feedback as (please select one):

open issues in our Github repo for each point of feedback (although until the PR lands, commenting on the PR directly is probably better)
open a single issue in our Github repo for the entire review
leave review feedback as a comment in this issue and @-notify [github usernames]

Please preview the issue and check that the links work before submitting

For background, see our explanation of how to write a good explainer.

Discussions

Comment by @kenchris Mar 26, 2019 (See Github)

@domenic should it be called stream() or reader() here to stay consistent with other specs?

Comment by @domenic Mar 28, 2019 (See Github)

There's no exact precedent, but stream() is more correct; you get a reader() from a stream via file.stream().getReader().

Comment by @kenchris Apr 10, 2019 (See Github)

OK, I am good with this change

Discussed Apr 17, 2019 (See Github)

Sangwhan: Add m

Discussed Apr 24, 2019 (See Github)

Sangwhan: a helper function - non-controversial. This is just a helper that makes it easier to read and write files - write slightly more idiomatic code. No issues with this.

Kenneth: me neither.

Peter: Seems reasonable to me.

David: Based on experience using Blob, it seems like a good thing, even if I haven't looked at exactly what it's adding.

Sangwhan: we can probably close this one.

Peter: let's close it

Comment by @kenchris Apr 24, 2019 (See Github)

Thanks for flying TAG! We looked at the additions and have no complains - this looks good!