Re: IndexedDB - renaming

On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 6:29 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:

> Arg, drats, I missed the "planning" part of your email :)
>
> Sounds good to me, the only thing I would add is that I think we
> should remove the base-interfaces, like IDBObjectStore, and copy the
> relevant properties to both (async and sync) sub-interfaces.
>

Agreed.  (IIRC, this was mentioned in another thread earlier as well, and no
one disagreed then either.)


> / Jonas
>
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 10:27 AM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
> > I still see the old "Request" post-fixed names when looking at
> >
> > http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/IndexedDB/#async-api
> >
> > Despite the top of the file saying that this is the June 10th version.
> > Is there somewhere else I should look?
> >
> > / Jonas
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 9:38 AM, Andrei Popescu <andreip@google.com>
> wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> A while ago, we discussed some simple renaming of the IndexedDB
> >> interfaces. I have already closed
> >>
> >> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9789
> >>
> >> as it was a very simple fix. I would like to recap the rest of the
> >> changes I am planning to make, just to make sure that everyone is ok
> >> with them:
> >>
> >> 1. Drop the "Request" prefix from our async interface names and add
> >> the "Sync" suffix to the sync interfaces.
> >>
> >> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9790
> >>
> >> 2. Rename IDBIndexedDatabase to IDBFactory. My original proposal was
> >> also renaming IDBDatabase to IDBConnection but Jonas had an objection
> >> to that. So let's keep it IDBDatabase for now.
>

Agreed.  Closed it as WontFix.


>  >>
> >> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9791
> >>
> >> What do you think?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Andrei
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>