- From: Nikunj Mehta <nikunj.mehta@oracle.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 23:32:31 -0700
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, public-webapps@w3.org
On Apr 23, 2009, at 1:47 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 22:18:40 +0200, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: >> The draft got published today, so it's too late to change the high- >> profile version of the spec. Rather than add this message, I'd like >> to just come >> to some sort of conclusion on the issue. What are the various >> proposals >> that exist to solve this problem other than SQL, and how willing >> are the >> browser vendors to implement those solutions? > > FWIW, Opera is primarily interested in implementing the APIs > currently in the specification (including the SQL API). Specifying > the specifics of the SQL dialect in due course would be good though, > but doing that does not seem very controversial and I would assume > is a requirement for going to Last Call. I am puzzled that you feel that specifying the semantics for the SQL dialect would be straightforward. We have no experience of using more than a single database implementation for WebStorage. Its kind of interesting that the WG is attempting to standardize that which has no more than a single implementation. Nikunj
Received on Friday, 24 April 2009 06:34:39 UTC