- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 14:25:03 -0400
- To: Kyaw Tun <kyawtun@yathit.com>
- CC: Webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
Hi - your comment is considered a "Last Call comment" and it was included in the LC's comment tracking document [1]. In [2], Joshua proposed this comment be addressed/resolved as a feature request and as such, it was added to the IDB feature request list [3]. For the purposes of tracking your comment, please indicate if this resolution is acceptable or not. -Thanks, ArtB [1] <https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/IndexedDB/raw-file/default/Comments-16-May-2013-LCWD.html> [2] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2013AprJun/0817.html> [3] <http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/IndexedDatabaseFeatures> On 5/19/13 11:14 PM, ext Kyaw Tun wrote: > It will be good, if we can provide data priority per database and/or > per object store. > > Web app already assume Indexeddb data is temporary, recovery process > are in place at the beginning after database is successfully open. So > silently drop all data and set version to 0 is good way to go. I think > detail reason are not necessary. > > After opening, database should not corrupt. But quota exceed error do > happen. It is very difficult and messy to handle that issue. > > If these corruption happen, data are lost according to their priority > will be good enough for most situation. It is easy for both sides > (developer and browser implementation). > > Kyaw
Received on Tuesday, 11 June 2013 18:25:33 UTC