https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45981
Web browser: ---
Bug ID: 45981
Summary: Implement IndexedDB for offline content storage
Product: MediaWiki
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: Unprioritized
Component: JavaScript
Assignee: [email protected]
Reporter: [email protected]
CC: [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]
Classification: Unclassified
Mobile Platform: ---
I would like to see Mediawiki give users the option to cache content pages
(explicitly chosen individual pages or whenever-visited pages, entire
category of pages, the entire site, etc., with the current snapshot if not
entire page histories) via IndexedDB--the NoSQL database standard agreed upon
by all major browsers (including Microsoft) as the way forward--for offline
reading (and ultimately querying).
Bug 45980 would also be a precondition for full offlineability of Mediawiki as
an application, and its ideal use case would be for allowing offline querying
as well, but implementation of IndexedDB could still be of use in the interim
for performance and possibly third party browser add-ons which sought to enable
querying today) if Mediawiki content could be cached using IndexedDB.
In response to a request for full offlineability of Mediawiki, in bug 28706
comment 7 it was stated "We have time to time such type of remark advocating a
nosql DB system to sotre WP offline. The problem is that as far as I know, none
of them is as efficient in term of compression/access speed/resource
consumption as ZIM. This would be interesting to get some benchmark about
indexdb with big corpus of Wikipedia content (with pictures) to see if indexdb
could be a valid choice, at all, to store big Wikipedia contents offline."
I therefore would like to ask that this request begin with such an
investigation of efficiency (although as a new technology, I would surmise
IndexedDB implementations might have some way to go), but even if it was not as
fast as other offline technologies, the integration into the Mediawiki platform
would still offer the unique benefit of being immediately usable as such
without extra software installation or downloads and could be implemented in a
manner to allow the user to choose which specific content (if not all) they
wanted to be stored for offline use, so I would hope that should such an
investigation find some relative shortcomings of IndexedDB, that implementation
still be pursued.
Browser restrictions or need for permission to increase memory size would need
to be taken into account.
Docs at http://www.w3.org/TR/IndexedDB/
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are watching all bug changes.
_______________________________________________
Wikibugs-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
