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

Re: [IndexedDB] Multientry with invalid keys

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 02:42:45 +0100
Message-ID: <CA+c2ei-tzdYZ_LuYVcPNJ9078quqzZDspLORn2L1AV0mhn8MZA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Israel Hilerio <israelh@microsoft.com>
Cc: "jsbell@chromium.org" <jsbell@chromium.org>, Odin HÝrthe Omdal (odinho@opera.com) <odinho@opera.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
Crap, we need to better about filing bugs :-)

Yes, my understanding is that there was agreement to update the spec such
that if evaluating and index's keyPath does not yield a valid key that does
not affect weather the value is inserted in the objectStore.

In other words, indexes do not add constraints other than when explicitly
called out using the 'unique' feature.

My logic was that it would be consistent with this behaviour to ignore any
invalid keys in a multiEntry index rather than to throw the whole thing out.

If people are on with this ill edit this into the spec over the weekend.

/ Jonas

On Saturday, March 3, 2012, Israel Hilerio wrote:

>  Iíve created a bug to track this issue:****
>
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16211****
>
> ** **
>
> Israel****
>
> ** **
>
> On Friday, March 02, 2012 4:39 PM, Odin HÝrthe Omdal wrote:****
>
> From: "Israel Hilerio" <israelh@microsoft.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'israelh@microsoft.com');>>****
>
> > Unfortunately, we didnít update the spec to reflect this agreement.****
>
> > You or I could open a bug to ensure the spec is updated to capture****
>
> > this change.****
>
> ** **
>
> Yes, better get it into the spec :-)****
>
> ** **
>
> About the behavior itself, FWIW, I think it's a reasonable one.****
>
> ** **
>
> --****
>
> Odin, Opera****
>
Received on Saturday, 3 March 2012 01:43:14 GMT

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