W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2012

Re: [IndexedDB] Numeric constants vs enumerated strings

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 17:56:05 +0100
Message-ID: <CA+c2ei_42ai6UiMAaX_T18=XO4YhVkJOkPTNpxpmdckf11AGjw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Cc: Israel Hilerio <israelh@microsoft.com>, James Robinson <jamesr@google.com>, Odin HÝrthe Omdal <odinho@opera.com>, Web Applications Working Group WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, Joshua Bell <jsbell@chromium.org>, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com> wrote:
>> It is our belief based on internal feedback and external partner feedback
>> that the technology will remain un-deployed and in draft form if we continue
>> to make changes like this.
>
> Yes it might take a little longer, but Indexed DB has not even been through
> a Last Call yet and you already want to freeze it? My impression of Indexed
> DB thus far has been that there has not been that much outside review yet.
> In any event, aligning it with Web IDL is important. And I hope Indexed DB
> will move away from DOMStringList too so that can be removed from the
> platform.

Just to be clear. We've all been here long enough to know that Last
Call is not what matters, what matters is when implementations ship
and when enough content is authored that making incompatible changes
will break too much content. This is an argument you yourself has made
in other specifications and which I agree is reality we have to live
with.

That said, I don't think there is enough content out there that would
break over this change, which is why I think it's an ok change to
make.

If you are worried IndexedDB hasn't received enough review, I strongly
encourage you to start reviewing.

I personally only know of one other "bad" thing in the API (the fact
that the second argument to openCursor is a string rather than a
dictionary), but since it's something that can be fixed in the next
version I prefer to fix it there.

There's also error handling which has been discussed on the mailing
list but where the conclusions from that discussion needs to be added
to the spec.

/ Jonas
Received on Tuesday, 28 February 2012 16:57:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:50 GMT