W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2010

Re: Seeking pre-LCWD comments for Indexed Database API; deadline February 2

From: Kris Zyp <kris@sitepen.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 17:37:51 -0600
Message-ID: <4C11774F.8090009@sitepen.com>
To: Pablo Castro <Pablo.Castro@microsoft.com>
CC: WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
Hash: SHA1

On 6/10/2010 4:15 PM, Pablo Castro wrote:
>>> From: public-webapps-request@w3.org
>>> [mailto:public-webapps-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Kris Zyp
>>> Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:49 AM Subject: Re: Seeking
>>> pre-LCWD comments for Indexed Database API; deadline February
>>> 2
>>> I see that in the trunk version of the spec [1] that delete()
>>> was changed to remove(). I thought we had established that
>>> there is no reason to make this change. Is anyone seriously
>>> expecting to have an implementation prior to or without ES5's
>>> contextually unreserved keywords? I would greatly prefer
>>> delete(), as it is much more consistent with standard DB and
>>> REST terminology.
> My concern is that it seems like taking an unnecessary risk. I
> understand the familiarity aspect (and I like delete() better as
> well), but to me that's not a strong enough reason to use it and
> potentially cause trouble in some browser.
So there is a real likelyhood of a browser implementation that will
predate it's associated JS engine's upgrade to ES5? Feeling a
"concern" isn't really much of technical argument on it's own, and
designing for outdated technology is a poor approach.

- -- 
Kris Zyp
(503) 806-1841
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
Received on Thursday, 10 June 2010 23:39:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:25 UTC