- From: Kris Zyp <kris@sitepen.com>
- Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2009 07:22:38 -0700
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- CC: Pablo Castro <Pablo.Castro@microsoft.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 FWIW, in the server side JavaScript realm, there has been growing interest in following the WebSimpleDB API as an generic API for interchangeable data storage systems, to provide a consistent interface for interacting with various DBs like MongoDB, JavaScriptDB, CouchDB, and even to some degree relational DBs (of course most DBs provide additional DB-specific funcionality). We are closely following the development of this API, since this is such an important part of JavaScript applications on the server, but I am in support of what I see so far. Thanks, Kris Jonas Sicking wrote: > On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:25 AM, Pablo Castro > <Pablo.Castro@microsoft.com> wrote: >> We’ve been looking at the web database space here at Microsoft, trying to >> understand scenarios and requirements. After assessing what was out there we >> are forming an opinion around this. I wanted to write to this group to share >> how we think about the space, what principles we try to apply, and to >> discuss specifics. >> >> The short story is that we believe Nikunj’s WebSimpleDB proposal, which >> basically describes a minimum-bar web database API and enables a whole set >> of diverse options to be built on top, is the right thing to do. >> >> During the last couple of weeks we have been talking with various folks from >> Mozilla and Oracle and iterating over details of the WebSimpleDB draft. In >> the process it has become clear that we all share the same high-level >> expectations on the scope and capabilities of this API, and Nikunj has been >> hard at work making changes to the draft to keep up with them. I’ll touch on >> a few details below, but bear in mind that several of them are already in >> the process of being addressed. >> >> We would love to hear feedback, requirements, specific application >> scenarios, etc. We want to make progress quickly and get experimental >> implementations going to ensure that as we explore we stay grounded, with >> things that are implementable. > > Hi Pablo, > > Sorry about the slow response. > > While there isn't such a thing as a official mozilla position, this > very closely (scaringly so ;) ) matches the thinking of most people > that have participated in the database discussions here. We've had > conversations with both Oracle and Microsoft, as well as with both > javascript developers and people that have worked with databases on > the web, such as the CouchDB people. > > >From basically everywhere we've gotten the feedback that a low-level > API in the style of WebSimpleDB is preferrable to the SQL based API in > the WebDatabase drafts. The main argument we got for an SQL based API > was "we don't care what we get, we just want something, though if we > got to pick a SQL API is not what we'd pick". > > So our recommendation is to start with WebSimpleDB and iterate on > that. The first thing we should do is to see where we can simplify > things. For example foreign keys, queues and database versions seems > like something that can probably be removed. > > We also got the feedback that something that's more event-based rather > than callback based was preferable (which came as a surprise to most > of us). Personally I think this change isn't as urgent, but I do think > it's something that should be fixed before implementations start to > happen. > > As I'm reading the latest editor drafts I see that some of these > changes have already been made, which is great to see. I need to > review these changes more in detail, but in the meantime I wanted to > let the WG know about what activities have been going on at mozilla. > > / Jonas > > - -- Kris Zyp SitePen (503) 806-1841 http://sitepen.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkrwPK0ACgkQ9VpNnHc4zAx+mgCgi9Da29Bp/q4Ua5h6/3rNRBTq 8EAAniVx3Le1aD7M/1J2g4+8K5NiqqYg =Kzmx -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Tuesday, 3 November 2009 14:23:18 UTC