W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > February 2013

Re: IndexedDB, what were the issues? How do we stop it from happening again?

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 06:56:52 -0500
Message-ID: <511B7F84.8020701@nokia.com>
To: ext Miko Nieminen <miko.nieminen@iki.fi>
CC: www-tag@w3.org
On 2/13/13 6:39 AM, ext Miko Nieminen wrote:
> I think IndexedDB is almost good enough for writing all kinds of 
> abstractions and reusable libraries on top of it. Only major issue I'm 
> having is the lack of ability to listen add, modify, delete events 
> through object store. This makes writing additional abstractions 
> unnecessarily painful when keeping things in-sync requires routing 
> notifications through local storage or other similar mechanism.
> So to raise my original question: what do you think, do I have any 
> realistic chances to get forward with this change?

I can't speak to the probability of success, but you could followup on 
your related February 5 post to WebApps [1] with a bug report [2] to add 
your proposed functionality. (If you need help creating that bug, please 
contact me off-list.)

FYI, I suspect most of the active contributors to the IDB spec 
(including implementers)  would not support adding this feature to v1 
but I don't see any harm in proposing it for v.next.


[2] <http://tinyurl.com/Bugz-IndexedDB>
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2013 11:57:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:33:19 UTC