Re: [w3c/IndexedDB] `getAll()` with both key and value (or index key and primary key) (#206)

+1 about "record" being a better term for `getAll...()` when applied to regular object stores. But for indexes, IIUC, "record" => `[indexKey, primaryKey]`. If we're agreed on returning `[primaryKey, value, indexKey]` from `IDBIndex.getAll...()`, then the contract of the new API isn't exactly about returning the records _as-is_ from the underlying (regular/index) object stores, but about returning a collection of attributes that we hope to be useful for both types of stores, and it just so happens to be the same as the record for regular object stores. From that perspective, it maybe better to use a new term, and "entry" could serve that purpose.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/IndexedDB/issues/206#issuecomment-2402275894
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3c/IndexedDB/issues/206/2402275894@github.com>