W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: [WebSQL] Any future plans, or has IndexedDB replaced WebSQL?

From: Keean Schupke <keean.schupke@googlemail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 22:31:25 +0000
Message-ID: <AANLkTinds2vuaVG9xh39tWFwG_1dbFGZiv8Xnh3tZynt@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: Benjamin Poulain <benjamin.poulain@nokia.com>, Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>, ext Nathan Kitchen <w3c@nathankitchen.com>, public-webapps@w3.org, Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
I would point out that RelationalDB is relationally complete and the api
does not depend on the sqlite spec at all.

Cheers
Keean
On Apr 1, 2011 8:58 PM, "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org> wrote:
>>> Lastly, some vendors have expressed unwillingness to embed SQLite for
>>> legal reasons. Embedding other peoples code definitely exposes you to
>>> risk of copyright and patent lawsuits. While I can't say that I fully
>>> agree with this reasoning, I'm also not the one that would be on the
>>> receiving end of a lawsuit. Nor am I a lawyer and so ultimately will
>>> have to defer to people that know better. In the end it doesn't really
>>> matter as if a browser won't embed SQLite then it doesn't matter why,
>>> the end result is that the same SQL dialect won't be available cross
>>> browser which is bad for the web.
>>
>> If SQLite was to be used as a web standard, I'd hope that it wouldn't
show
>> up in a spec as simply "do what SQLite does", but as a complete spec of
>> SQLite's behavior.  Browser vendors could then, if their lawyers
insisted,
>> implement their own compatible implementation, just as they do with other
>> web APIs.  I'd expect large portions of SQLite's test suite to be
adaptable
>> as a major starting point for spec tests, too.
>
> Have you read the WebSQL spec?
>
>> Creating such a spec would be a formidable task, of course.
>
> Indeed. One that the SQL community has failed in doing so far. And
> they have a lot more experience with SQL than we do.
>
> / Jonas
>
Received on Monday, 4 April 2011 16:57:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:44 GMT