W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2010

Re: [IndexedDB] Detailed comments for the current draft

From: Shawn Wilsher <sdwilsh@mozilla.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 14:56:58 -0700
Message-ID: <4BABDC2A.2010006@mozilla.com>
To: Nikunj Mehta <nikunj@o-micron.com>
CC: Pablo Castro <Pablo.Castro@microsoft.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 1/31/2010 11:33 PM, Nikunj Mehta wrote:
>> a.       3.1.3: do we really need in-line + out-of-line keys? Besides 
>> the concept-count increase, we wonder whether out-of-line keys would 
>> cause trouble to generic libraries, as the values for the keys 
>> wouldn't be part of the values iterated when doing a "foreach" over 
>> the table.
>
>
> Certainly it is a matter of prioritizing among various requirements. 
> Out-of-line keys enable people to store simple persistent hash maps. I 
> think it would be wrong to require that data be always stored as 
> objects. A library can always elide the availability of out-of-line 
> keys if that poses a problem to its users.
What about just supporting out-of-line keys?  If somebody wanted the key 
to be part of what they were iterating, they could still have the object 
contain the key.

With that said, wouldn't a persistent hash map be better done in local 
or session storage?  I really think we should drop one of these 
concepts.  I don't presently have a strong opinion on which.

Cheers,

Shawn



Received on Thursday, 25 March 2010 21:57:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:37 GMT