News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on KV Storage, the Web's First Built-In Module. Parent comment

Re:KV Storage, the Web's First Built-In Module by klodolph on Tuesday March 12, 2019 @01:24AM (#19365636)
In the 90s you would be right, these days web standards don’t get standardized without having implementations first.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:KV Storage, the Web's First Built-In Module by _puk on Tuesday March 12, 2019 @03:59AM (#19366183)
Tell that to WebSQL..

All vendors implemented (essentially) the same API, then the W3C subsequently abandoned it due to lack of independent implementations [0].

0: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_SQL_Database

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:KV Storage, the Web's First Built-In Module by comex on Tuesday March 12, 2019 @04:37AM (#19366330)
As far as I can tell, only two browser engines ever implemented WebSQL: Safari and Chrome's WebKit (which hadn't yet been forked into Blink), and Opera's Presto (which hadn't yet been abandoned in favor of Chromium). Firefox never implemented it, and neither did IE (Edge hadn't been announced yet), so it certainly wasn't implemented by "all vendors". And both implementations were just thin wrappers around the same library, SQLite, so the W3C was correct in saying there were no actual independent implementations.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:KV Storage, the Web's First Built-In Module by coldtea on Tuesday March 12, 2019 @07:15AM (#19367021)
>And both implementations were just thin wrappers around the same library, SQLite, so the W3C was correct in saying there were no actual independent implementations.

Why should there be?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:KV Storage, the Web's First Built-In Module by developit on Tuesday March 12, 2019 @07:23AM (#19367069)
Not a great example, since "independent" is the important bit there: browsers just shipped sqlite, and you can't have a spec that says "just ship sqlite".
[ Parent | on HN ]