Re: Let's turn WebDatabase into a WG Note

On Nov 18, 2009, at 2:03 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 9:35 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>  
> wrote:
> Further: if the other vendors planning to ship Web Database  
> implementations (Google, Opera
>
> What they are going to ship is mostly the same implementation as  
> yours.

It sounds like Opera intends to use the same database engine, but I  
would be very surprised if they used any of our code that implements  
the API, threading, query management, etc. As I've mentioned before,  
that is a substantial amount of code, and is the part that implements  
what the Web Database actually specifies.

>
> But I agree that it's premature to abandon WebDatabase. You should  
> have a chance to spec out the SQL dialect. There is negligible risk  
> of anyone significant implementing WebDatabase unaware of the  
> objections. There is a greater risk that authors will come to depend  
> on it because they think it's headed for spec status, but  
> implementations and marketing will encourage that anyway.

Some authors have already come to depend on it without really caring  
about the future or present spec status. I don't think we can stuff  
that genie back in the bottle.

Regards,
Maciej