- From: Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa <w3c@hoa-project.net>
- Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2009 18:43:51 +0200
- To: public-webapps@w3c.org
-------- Message original -------- Sujet: Re: Web Storage & SQL Date : Thu, 9 Apr 2009 18:28:10 +0200 De : Giovanni Campagna <scampa.giovanni@gmail.com> Pour : Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa <w3c@hoa-project.net> 2009/4/9 Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa<w3c@hoa-project.net>: > Hi :-), > > Le 9/04/09 17:29, Giovanni Campagna a écrit : >> >> 2009/4/9 Boris Zbarsky<bzbarsky@mit.edu>: >> >>> >>> Giovanni Campagna wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> So why not adding a parameter on openDatabase() to specify what kind >>>> of database we want (and what kind of query language we will use)? >>>> I mean something like >>>> openDatabase(name, version, type, displayName, estimatedSize) >>>> where type can be any string >>>> so, for example, type = "sql" uses the standard SQL, type="sqlite" >>>> uses SQLite extensions, type="-vendor-xyz" is a vendor specific >>>> extension, etc. >>>> >>> >>> How does this solve the original "no such thing as standard SQL, really" >>> issue? >>> >> >> We have a standard SQL, and we have DBMS-specific extensions (for >> SQLite, for MySQL, for SQLServer, etc.). >> The latest version is "ISO/IEC 9075:2008 Information technology -- >> Database languages -- SQL", released in 2008, but actively being >> revised, according to the ISO page. >> As usual, if you want interoperability, you use the existing, >> implemented, standard (or you ask the ISO to produce an updated >> standard with new features), else you use extensions. >> > > A Database Abstract Layer (DAL, i.e. a system that enables user to select > the Relational Database Management System, RDMS, to use) is a good idea but > it does not sound standard anymore. I mean: we are postponing the problem, > because who, why and how will decide what RDMS must be implemented? > What about XML based database? > > Best regards. First, we have "sql". This is the start of the Database proposals, and all conforming implementation must expose an SQL interface that is conforming to the ISO standard I cited before. Then we could add "xml" and "json" (or other formats) as standard to be implemented by everyone. This is only a choice of query language and data model (trees, objects and tables), not of the DBMS (SQLite vs SQLServer), and I hope this choice will be made by the WebApps Working Group, as this is the WG chartered for the WebStorage proposal. Thirdly, we have extension, in the form of "-vendor-dbms". For example, I may expect that IE will have a "-ms-sqlserver". These formats are by definition out of standard, but they allow the use of extensions beyond the ISO SQL standard. > -- > Ivan Enderlin > Developper of Hoa Framework > http://hoa-project.net/ > > > Giovanni
Received on Thursday, 9 April 2009 16:44:31 UTC