Re: CfC: FPWD of Server-Sent Events, Web Sockets API, Web Storage, and Web Workers; deadline April 10

Hmm.. I tend to agree. Using an SQL database is only one possible
solution that we should be examining. I would rather say that we
should provide storage for structured data inside the UA. I'm not a
fan of calling out neither SQL or name-value pair storage.

At the same time I'm not sure that I care that much about it, as long
as we can change the draft later in case the spec takes a different
turn than the current drafts.

/ Jonas

On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 2:44 PM, Nikunj Mehta <nikunj.mehta@oracle.com> wrote:
> Apparently the new charter [1] that forces everyone to re-join the WG also
> lists among its deliverables as WebStorage with the explanation that
> WebStorage is
>
> "two APIs for client-side data storage in Web applications: a name-value
> pair system, and a database system with a SQL frontend"
>
> Clearly, if the WD of WebStorage has in its abstract something more general,
> the charter should not be so specific.
>
> I now understand that this new piece of text made its way into the charter
> recently. The last message I can see about charter change for WebApps [1]
> only talks about adding WebWorkers. Apparently other changes were also made,
> but no diff provided to members about the charter change proposal.
>
> Can you throw some light on this?
>
> Nikunj
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2009/04/webapps-charter
> [2] http://www.w3.org/mid/3E428EC7-1960-4ECE-B403-827BA47FE1EB@nokia.comIan
> Hickson wrote:
>
> On Fri, 10 Apr 2009, Nikunj Mehta wrote:
>
>
> Here's what Oracle would like to see in the abstract:
>
> This specification defines two APIs for persistent data storage in Web
> clients: one for accessing key-value pair data and another for accessing
> structured data.
>
>
> Done.
>
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 21 April 2009 22:23:22 UTC