Re: [WebSQL] Any future plans, or has IndexedDB replaced WebSQL?

On 4 April 2011 16:04, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 8:07 AM, Joran Greef <joran@ronomon.com> wrote:
> > On 04 Apr 2011, at 4:39 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> >> Hence it would still be the case that we would be relying on the
> >> SQLite developers to maintain a stable SQL interpretation...
> >
> > SQLite has a fantastic track record of maintaining backwards
> compatibility.
> >
> > IndexedDB has as yet no track record, no consistent implementations, no
> widespread deployment,
>
> It's new.
>
>
> > only measurably poor performance
>
> Ironically, the poor performance is because it's using sqlite as a
> backing-store in the current implementation.  That's being fixed by
> replacing sqlite.
>
>
> > and a lukewarm indexing and querying API.
>
> Kinda the point, in that the power/complexity of SQL confuses a huge
> number of develoeprs, who end up coding something which doesn't
> actually use the relational model in any significant way, but still
> pays the cost of it in syntax.
>
> (I found normalization forms and similar things completely trivial
> when I was learning SQL, but for some reason almost every codebase
> I've looked at has a horribly-structured db.  As far as I can tell,
> the majority of developers just hack SQL into being a linear object
> store and do the rest in their application code.  We can reduce the
> friction here by actually giving them a linear object store, which is
> what IndexedDB is.)


> ~TJ
>
>
SQLite has seen really good use in the mobile app community on both iPhone
and Android. I would have thought that if we wanted the same kind of
thriving app developer community around HTML5 web-apps, taking a few leaves
from the mobile developers book would not be a bad idea?

IMHO its those kind of developers HTML5 should be trying to attract, in
addition to the current web developers.


Cheers,
Keean.