- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 10:51:23 +0200
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- CC: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>, "Ralph R. Swick" <swick@w3.org>, "'Tab Atkins Jr.'" <jackalmage@gmail.com>, WHAT-WG <whatwg@whatwg.org>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, "Bonner, Matt" <matt.bonner@hp.com>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "www-archive@w3.org" <www-archive@w3.org>
Ian Hickson wrote: > Using table storage with a SQL query front-end wasn't a requirement, it > was a solution, just like using XML, using triple stores, etc could have > been. It just happened that SQL solved the problem better. For example, > one of the use cases was the ability to easily use the same kind of data > model as was being used server-side. We actually tried exposing an XML > front-end at one point, but implementors didn't want to implement it (see > the old API for what was called globalStorage at the time). The trouble with "push the SQL database from the server to the client" is that it requires all web applications that want to take advantage of client-side storage to agree on a particular SQL version / subset / implementation. It will be interesting to see how that works. BR, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 26 August 2008 08:52:08 UTC