On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 6:13 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
>
> There are many use cases, e.g. Google is interested in this to enable its
> applications to be taken offline. We recently released offline GMail using
> this SQL backend; one could easily imagine other applications like
> Calendar, Reader, Do
On Apr 10, 2009, at 3:13 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009, Nikunj Mehta wrote:
Can someone state the various requirements for Web Storage? I did not
find them enunciated anywhere.
There's only one requirement that I know of:
* Allow Web sites to store structured data on the clien
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009, Nikunj Mehta wrote:
>
> Can someone state the various requirements for Web Storage? I did not
> find them enunciated anywhere.
There's only one requirement that I know of:
* Allow Web sites to store structured data on the client.
There are many use cases, e.g. Google is in
Nikunj Mehta wrote:
One clear problem identified despite these examples is that we do not
have a precise enough spec for the query language to make truly
independent interoperable implementations possible.
There are several different query languages that can be interoperably
implemented - Luc
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
I don't think this one point should be decisive by itself. But I don't
think it should be given zero weight either.
Agreed (in case that wasn't clear).
Note that one of the clients in question is the offline-enabled mobile
version of GMail. I think this demonstrates t
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009, Nikunj Mehta wrote:
>
> Here's what Oracle would like to see in the abstract:
>
> This specification defines two APIs for persistent data storage in Web
> clients: one for accessing key-value pair data and another for accessing
> structured data.
Done.
--
Ian Hickson
On Apr 10, 2009, at 1:53 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
One clear problem identified despite these examples is that we do
not have a precise enough spec for the query language to make truly
independent interoperable implementations possible.
There are several different query languages that c
On Apr 9, 2009, at 5:38 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
I agree that "no such thing as standard SQL" (or rather the fact
that implementations all have extensions and divergences from the
spec) is a problem. But I am not sure inventing a brand new query
language and datab
Just a clarification about the charter...
On Apr 10, 2009, at 9:50 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
Regarding a WG Note, that doesn't seem appropriate in this case
since the WG's plan of record (Charter) is to create a
Recommendation for this spec.
The charter [1] includes "Offline APIs and Struc
Hi Art,
Oracle conditionally supports the publishing this draft as FPWD
provided that the abstract is worded appropriately. The reason to
clarify the abstract is so that the WG doesn't build an implicit
expectation that it will /only/ produce a SQL-based API in Web Storage.
Here's what Or
This is to support things like data URLs that can't be represented as
a (scheme, host, port) tuple.
Adam
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Bil Corry wrote:
> I wanted to clarify something in the IETF Origin draft[1], which is now going
> to serve as the basis for HTML5's Origin.
>
> Section 5 re
Hi Nikunj,
On Apr 10, 2009, at 10:42 AM, ext Nikunj Mehta wrote:
Oracle does not support the substance of the current Web Storage draft
[1][2][3]. This is a path-breaking change to the Web applications
platform and rushing such a major change without substantive
consideration of alternatives is
Oracle does not support the substance of the current Web Storage draft
[1][2][3]. This is a path-breaking change to the Web applications
platform and rushing such a major change without substantive
consideration of alternatives is not in its own best interest. Oracle
does not see it fit to
Hi :-),
My opinion about the web storage & SQL is splitted in two parts.
On the one hand, making a subset of SQL instructions is very difficult.
Each of us knows that and no-one would say the contrary.
On the other hand, I have made an ORM in the past, build on two layers.
The first one is a d
14 matches
Mail list logo
