I would point out that RelationalDB is relationally complete and the api does not depend on the sqlite spec at all.
Cheers Keean On Apr 1, 2011 8:58 PM, "Jonas Sicking" <jo...@sicking.cc> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Glenn Maynard <gl...@zewt.org> wrote: >>> Lastly, some vendors have expressed unwillingness to embed SQLite for >>> legal reasons. Embedding other peoples code definitely exposes you to >>> risk of copyright and patent lawsuits. While I can't say that I fully >>> agree with this reasoning, I'm also not the one that would be on the >>> receiving end of a lawsuit. Nor am I a lawyer and so ultimately will >>> have to defer to people that know better. In the end it doesn't really >>> matter as if a browser won't embed SQLite then it doesn't matter why, >>> the end result is that the same SQL dialect won't be available cross >>> browser which is bad for the web. >> >> If SQLite was to be used as a web standard, I'd hope that it wouldn't show >> up in a spec as simply "do what SQLite does", but as a complete spec of >> SQLite's behavior. Browser vendors could then, if their lawyers insisted, >> implement their own compatible implementation, just as they do with other >> web APIs. I'd expect large portions of SQLite's test suite to be adaptable >> as a major starting point for spec tests, too. > > Have you read the WebSQL spec? > >> Creating such a spec would be a formidable task, of course. > > Indeed. One that the SQL community has failed in doing so far. And > they have a lot more experience with SQL than we do. > > / Jonas >
