- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 12:53:49 -0700
- To: Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>
- Cc: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, Benjamin Poulain <benjamin.poulain@nokia.com>, ext Nathan Kitchen <w3c@nathankitchen.com>, public-webapps@w3.org
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org> wrote: >> Lastly, some vendors have expressed unwillingness to embed SQLite for >> legal reasons. Embedding other peoples code definitely exposes you to >> risk of copyright and patent lawsuits. While I can't say that I fully >> agree with this reasoning, I'm also not the one that would be on the >> receiving end of a lawsuit. Nor am I a lawyer and so ultimately will >> have to defer to people that know better. In the end it doesn't really >> matter as if a browser won't embed SQLite then it doesn't matter why, >> the end result is that the same SQL dialect won't be available cross >> browser which is bad for the web. > > If SQLite was to be used as a web standard, I'd hope that it wouldn't show > up in a spec as simply "do what SQLite does", but as a complete spec of > SQLite's behavior. Browser vendors could then, if their lawyers insisted, > implement their own compatible implementation, just as they do with other > web APIs. I'd expect large portions of SQLite's test suite to be adaptable > as a major starting point for spec tests, too. Have you read the WebSQL spec? > Creating such a spec would be a formidable task, of course. Indeed. One that the SQL community has failed in doing so far. And they have a lot more experience with SQL than we do. / Jonas
Received on Friday, 1 April 2011 19:54:51 UTC