Re: Replacing WebSQL with a Relational Data Model.

Hi Nathan,

On 27 October 2010 08:58, Nathan Kitchen <w3c@nathankitchen.com> wrote:

> The most obvious problem was that it was tied so tightly to SQLite (which I
> think everyone would be amazed if MS started shipping with IE10). They'd
> want to use Access/SQL Compact, and suddenly we'd all have different SQL
> dialects to code our offline applications to.


 I am sure you are aware, but the relation API I am proposing would not have
this problem. The relational algebra is defined independently of any SQL
implementation. Infact its not even SQL. However a relational database (like
SQLite, MySQL, Access/SQL Compact) would make the ideal library to use in
its implementation because of the huge amount of work done over may years by
researchers and programmers to make a decent relational database engine that
we do not want to have to replicate in JavaScript on top of IndexedDB.


> Which is why I agree 100% with this statement:
>
>
> *The critical point here is that we need only one standardized interface,
>> not a perfectly optimized for data-model-x one, not a uses
>> query-language-foo one, just something that we can all use to persist data
>> from javascript, and wrap in other APIs, that way any optimizations made
>> will benefit everybody - regardless of their preferred interface, data model
>> & query style.*
>
>
And I totally agree with this statement, which is why I think it is critical
a _relationally_complete_ API is standardised (either in this, or a later
IndexedDB spec, or another spec entirely).


Cheers,
Keean.