W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2010

Re: Interface names in IndexedDB (and WebSQLDatabase)

From: Nikunj Mehta <nikunj@o-micron.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 08:16:42 -0800
Cc: public-webapps@w3c.org
Message-Id: <69CB9F61-CC3E-433A-B821-B8686E737E75@o-micron.com>
To: Jeremy Orlow <jorlow@chromium.org>

On Jan 22, 2010, at 12:01 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:

> The interface names in IndexedDB (and to an extent, WebSQLDatabase)  
> are very generic.  Surprisingly, the specs only collide via the  
> "Database" interface (which is why I bring this up), but I'm  
> concerned that names like Cursor, Transaction, and Index (from  
> IndexedDB) are so generic that they're bound to conflict with other  
> specs down the road.
> Note that all but 5 interfaces in the WebSQLDatabase spec are  
> prefixed with SQL (for example, SQLTransaction) which helps a lot.   
> It seems as though the remaining could also be prefixed by SQL to  
> solve the problem.

That will help.

> I'm wondering if the majority of the IndexedDB interfaces should  
> also have some prefix (like IDB?) as well since many of its terms  
> are quite generic.

I am fine with the following renaming:

Database -> IndexedDatabase
Cursor -> IDBCursor
Transaction -> IDBTransaction
Index -> IDBIndex

Received on Friday, 22 January 2010 16:18:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:13:04 UTC