Re: Interface names in IndexedDB (and WebSQLDatabase)

On Jan 22, 2010, at 12:01 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:

> The interface names in IndexedDB (and to an extent, WebSQLDatabase)  
> are very generic.  Surprisingly, the specs only collide via the  
> "Database" interface (which is why I bring this up), but I'm  
> concerned that names like Cursor, Transaction, and Index (from  
> IndexedDB) are so generic that they're bound to conflict with other  
> specs down the road.
>
> Note that all but 5 interfaces in the WebSQLDatabase spec are  
> prefixed with SQL (for example, SQLTransaction) which helps a lot.   
> It seems as though the remaining could also be prefixed by SQL to  
> solve the problem.

That will help.

>
> I'm wondering if the majority of the IndexedDB interfaces should  
> also have some prefix (like IDB?) as well since many of its terms  
> are quite generic.

I am fine with the following renaming:

Database -> IndexedDatabase
Cursor -> IDBCursor
Transaction -> IDBTransaction
Index -> IDBIndex

Nikunj