W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2011

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

From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 23:19:03 -0700
Message-Id: <15193721-2F3E-473B-BABD-F99910BC47B5@jumis.com>
Cc: Ryan Fugger <arv@ryanfugger.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
In fairness, and perspective, GLSL is a big leap, adding one more language with neat features like swizzle and matrix math.

SQL is too big a leap for the time being. I'd like to see a continued effort at 'borrowing' from our new web family member, glsl. Typed arrays are wonderful. There's been a little exploration into CSSMatrix for mat4 operations. Interesting stuff.

That's my top-post opinion.

I have a lot of respect for sqlite-- postgres devs gave me the impression they'd prefer a method based API over relexing or reusing the sqlite dialect.


On Apr 6, 2011, at 10:24 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU> wrote:

> On 4/4/11 10:15 AM, Ryan Fugger wrote:
>>> That's not the only reason.  Mozilla laid out others ten months ago:
>>> https://hacks.mozilla.org/2010/06/beyond-html5-database-apis-and-the-road-to-indexeddb/
>> Mozilla's plan appears to be to implement IndexedDB on top of SQLite,
> This is not a plan so much as a current stopgap.
> > Why not just expose the thing and let developers worry about whether
> > what they're using is standard or not, and suffer the consequences
> > later, if in fact there are any?
> Because due to the incentive structure here the entities making the bad decisions are not the ones who end up having to suffer the consequences.  It's a typical case of externalizing the negatives.
>> It seems to me that the proper role for standards
>> is to step in and help clear things up when they get messy
> Often it's too late by then.
> -Boris
Received on Thursday, 7 April 2011 06:19:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:13:19 UTC