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

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

From: Joran Greef <joran@ronomon.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 19:30:58 +0200
Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
Message-Id: <0156049A-C80C-45D6-A76B-EDBFD652A45E@ronomon.com>
To: Shawn Wilsher <sdwilsh@mozilla.com>
On 06 Apr 2011, at 7:14 PM, Shawn Wilsher wrote:

> On 4/6/2011 9:44 AM, Joran Greef wrote:
>> We only need one fixed version of SQLite to be shipped across Chrome, Safari, Opera, Firefox and IE. That in itself would represent a tremendous goal for IndexedDB to target and to try and achieve. When it actually does, and surpasses the fixed version of SQLite, those developers requiring the raw performance and reliability of SQLite could then switch over.
> I don't believe any browser vendor would be interested in shipping two different version of SQLite (one for internal use, and one for the web).  I can say, with certainty, that Mozilla is not.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Shawn

If Mozilla enjoys using the latest version of SQLite (and I assume they are not planning on replacing internal SQLite embeddings with IndexedDB - not at this stage at least), then web developers deserve the latest version.

Ship the latest version of SQLite (even with the -moz prefix). Developers targeting "HTML 5" are used to API changes, waiting on browsers and trying to reason about broken implementations. The library writers will quickly grow over any SQLite version changes should they even ever arise.

Would you run the Mozilla production database on any browser's implementation of IndexedDB? How can you expect developers to run their production client code on IndexedDB? It's simply not ready and will not be for at least a year or two or three. How likely is it that SQLite (given it's history) will remove the SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE, DELETE statements before then?
Received on Wednesday, 6 April 2011 17:31:31 GMT

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