W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: Points of order on this WG

From: Arun Ranganathan <arun@mozilla.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 22:38:39 -0700
Message-ID: <4A430D5F.6060207@mozilla.com>
To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
CC: "Nikunj R. Mehta" <nikunj.mehta@oracle.com>, public-webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, Jeff Mischkinsky <JEFF.MISCHKINSKY@oracle.com>
Doug Schepers wrote:
> Hi, Nikunj-
>
> I think Mike was overly blunt, but essentially correct in his 
> response, but I'd like to add a specific comment inline...
>
> Nikunj R. Mehta wrote (on 6/24/09 8:13 PM):
>>
>> On Jun 23, 2009, at 5:10 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
>>> The Web Storage specification is someone dead-locked right now due 
>>> to the
>>> lack of consensus on whether to use SQL or not.
>
> I don't buy this argument for an instant, and I'd be very surprised if 
> anyone in the WebApps WG did.  This specification was published as 
> specified because it matched the behavior (more or less) of an 
> implementation (WebKit), and it's disingenuous to pretend that that 
> doesn't set a precedent for the future development of the specification.
This topic continues to be discussed in Mozilla newsgroups.  Few are 
reconciled to SQL usage:

Example: 
http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.community.web-standards/topics

Solutions such as BrowserCouch (which straddles localStorage currently) 
offer other options: http://www.toolness.com/wp/?p=580

I'd personally rather see a clear articulation of use cases that we 
agree are important for the web than further specification work.

-- A*
Received on Thursday, 25 June 2009 05:39:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:31 GMT