- From: Jeremy Orlow <jorlow@chromium.org>
- Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 11:00:50 +0000
- To: public-webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <AANLkTik=MsckXOhRk6bb1wubaQ78UVunK8XgKOxwizeO@mail.gmail.com>
For over a year now, the WebStorage spec has stipulated that Local/SessionStorage store and retrieve objects per the structured clone algorithm rather than strings. And yet there isn't a single implementation who's implemented this. I've talked to people in the know from several of the other major browsers and, although no one is super against implementing it (including us), no one has it on any of their (even internal) roadmaps. It's just not a high enough priority for anyone at the moment. Yet any person who reads the spec gets a very different impression [1]. I personally have talked to dozens of very confused individuals who actually read the spec and are confused as to why they can't store anything other than strings in any implementation. Our developer relations team has talked to many more. And everyone keeps thinking support for structured clones is just around the horizon. I feel pretty strongly that we should _at least_ put in some non-normative note that no browser vendor is currently planning on implementing this feature. Or, better yet, just remove it from the spec until support starts emerging. J [1] The WebStorage specs is one of the most approachable and thus people actually do read it. In fact, even for many expert web developers, it's the first spec they've ever read.
Received on Wednesday, 24 November 2010 11:01:42 UTC