Re: [Bug 15434] New: [IndexedDB] Detail steps for assigning a key to a value

2012-01-25 Thread Joshua Bell
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Joshua Bell jsb...@chromium.org wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: What happens if a value higher up in the keyPath is not an object: store =

Re: [Bug 15434] New: [IndexedDB] Detail steps for assigning a key to a value

2012-01-25 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Joshua Bell jsb...@chromium.org wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Joshua Bell jsb...@chromium.org wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:

Re: [Bug 15434] New: [IndexedDB] Detail steps for assigning a key to a value

2012-01-24 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Joshua Bell jsb...@chromium.org wrote: There's another edge case here - what happens on a put (etc) request to an object store with a key generator when the object store's key path does not yield a value, yet the algorithm below exits without changing the value.

Re: [Bug 15434] New: [IndexedDB] Detail steps for assigning a key to a value

2012-01-24 Thread Joshua Bell
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Joshua Bell jsb...@chromium.org wrote: There's another edge case here - what happens on a put (etc) request to an object store with a key generator when the object store's key path does

Re: [Bug 15434] New: [IndexedDB] Detail steps for assigning a key to a value

2012-01-24 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Joshua Bell jsb...@chromium.org wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Joshua Bell jsb...@chromium.org wrote: There's another edge case here - what happens on a put (etc) request to an

RE: [Bug 15434] New: [IndexedDB] Detail steps for assigning a key to a value

2012-01-24 Thread Israel Hilerio
On Tuesday, January 24, 2012 11:38 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Joshua Bell jsb...@chromium.org wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote: On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Joshua Bell jsb...@chromium.org wrote: There's

Re: [Bug 15434] New: [IndexedDB] Detail steps for assigning a key to a value

2012-01-24 Thread Jonas Sicking
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Joshua Bell jsb...@chromium.org wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Israel Hilerio isra...@microsoft.com wrote: On Tuesday, January 24, 2012 11:38 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote: Based on this (pending details from microsoft of course) I suggest the

Re: [Bug 15434] New: [IndexedDB] Detail steps for assigning a key to a value

2012-01-23 Thread Joshua Bell
There's another edge case here - what happens on a put (etc) request to an object store with a key generator when the object store's key path does not yield a value, yet the algorithm below exits without changing the value. Sample: store = db.createObjectStore(my-store, {keyPath: a.b,

Re: [Bug 15434] New: [IndexedDB] Detail steps for assigning a key to a value

2012-01-11 Thread Joshua Bell
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Joshua Bell jsb...@chromium.org wrote: I thought this issue was theoretical when I filed it, but it appears to be the reason behind the difference in results for IE10 vs. Chrome 17 when running this test:

RE: [Bug 15434] New: [IndexedDB] Detail steps for assigning a key to a value

2012-01-11 Thread Israel Hilerio
We updated Section 3.1.3 with examples to capture the behavior you are seeing in IE. Based on this section, if the attribute doesn't exists and there is an autogen is set to true the attribute is added to the structure and can be used to access the generated value. The use case for this is to

Re: [Bug 15434] New: [IndexedDB] Detail steps for assigning a key to a value

2012-01-11 Thread Joshua Bell
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Israel Hilerio isra...@microsoft.comwrote: We updated Section 3.1.3 with examples to capture the behavior you are seeing in IE. Ah, I missed this, looking for normative text. :) Based on this section, if the attribute doesn’t exists and there is an autogen

RE: [Bug 15434] New: [IndexedDB] Detail steps for assigning a key to a value

2012-01-11 Thread Israel Hilerio
Great! I will work with Eliot to unify the language and update the spec. Israel On Wednesday, January 11, 2012 3:45 PM, Joshua Bell wrote: On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Israel Hilerio isra...@microsoft.commailto:isra...@microsoft.com wrote: We updated Section 3.1.3 with examples to capture

Re: [Bug 15434] New: [IndexedDB] Detail steps for assigning a key to a value

2012-01-11 Thread Joshua Bell
I thought this issue was theoretical when I filed it, but it appears to be the reason behind the difference in results for IE10 vs. Chrome 17 when running this test: http://samples.msdn.microsoft.com/ietestcenter/indexeddb/indexeddb_harness.htm?url=idbobjectstore_add8.htm If I'm reading the test