Hi Nathan, On 27 October 2010 08:58, Nathan Kitchen <w3c@nathankitchen.com> wrote: > The most obvious problem was that it was tied so tightly to SQLite (which I > think everyone would be amazed if MS started shipping with IE10). They'd > want to use Access/SQL Compact, and suddenly we'd all have different SQL > dialects to code our offline applications to. I am sure you are aware, but the relation API I am proposing would not have this problem. The relational algebra is defined independently of any SQL implementation. Infact its not even SQL. However a relational database (like SQLite, MySQL, Access/SQL Compact) would make the ideal library to use in its implementation because of the huge amount of work done over may years by researchers and programmers to make a decent relational database engine that we do not want to have to replicate in JavaScript on top of IndexedDB. > Which is why I agree 100% with this statement: > > > *The critical point here is that we need only one standardized interface, >> not a perfectly optimized for data-model-x one, not a uses >> query-language-foo one, just something that we can all use to persist data >> from javascript, and wrap in other APIs, that way any optimizations made >> will benefit everybody - regardless of their preferred interface, data model >> & query style.* > > And I totally agree with this statement, which is why I think it is critical a _relationally_complete_ API is standardised (either in this, or a later IndexedDB spec, or another spec entirely). Cheers, Keean.
Received on Wednesday, 27 October 2010 08:11:32 UTC