On Mon, 09 Nov 2009 03:44:09 -0800, Maciej Stachowiak <[email protected]>
wrote:
At the Web Apps WG face-to-face meeting at TPAC, all parties agreed (in
the room at least) to let the spec continue without fully specifying the
SQL dialect.
This is not at all the sense that I got. Hixie agreed to specify something
that he could copy-and-paste, since he doesn't see the value in working
hard on agreeing to a dialect where two major players aren't interested,
and others are sufficiently unimpressed by the SQL approach that they plan
to follow the WebSimpleDB approach.
The reason is that all parties who currently have or are in the process
of developing implementations did not appear to need it, and the parties
that would be blocked (Mozilla, Microsoft) said their decision would not
be swayed by having a spec, and would not implement regardless. Thus, it
did not seem there would be a practical benefit to specifying the SQL
dialect. Thus, those present said they were satisfied to specify that
SQLite v3 is the dialect.
In other words, there is a specified dialogue - but not enough apparent
energy to try and go further.
My sense is that this much agreement was considered important to justify
keeping the spec in the WG.
Note: I would try to find Apple resources to help write a SQL dialect
spec if anyone says it will materially help them to have such a spec
(and the level of interest doesn't reach the threshold where Hixie wants
to write it himself). I don't think I could get resources if it's just a
busywork exercise.
Opera would be interested in you doing that (or Hixie, but it seems he is
not) so we could keep building interoperable implementations, if you're
not happy with SQLite v3.
cheers
Chaals
--
Charles McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group
je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
