liked the
experience (messy code/overhead) and haven't had any desire to write another
with a client side DB again. The bright side for is however it drove me to
learn iOS and Android development... not such a great day for the web though
as I suspect my experience isn't unique.

------
mwexler
As always, there are some problems IndexedDB document stores solve well, and
others that SQL is really well suited for, and I think it's great to have both
options. What sucks is when people say "Sure, we'll support that there is more
than one way to do this (TMTOWTDI), as long as you recognize that my way is
the right way in almost all foreseeable cases, so we'll build the tool this
way". That statement is rarely correct, especially when making a browser
capability. (Yes, I know, trying to disprove a generalization with a
generalization isn't very persuasive. Oh well.)

I read all the concerns (it's a standard built around sqllite, and who wants
that?!?!, etc.) and I still sigh a sigh of disappointment that it's come to
this. I know, Web SQL isn't going away, as the author points out, but it will
be a 2nd class citizen for the foreseeable future, and that's just a missed
opportunity, imho.

~~~
yogo
Exactly they both have scenarios that they work very well for just like you
have with the server-side SQL RDBMS and the NoSQL ones. IndexedDB is fine for
simpler apps or apps where there isn't a real need for joining, grouping and
ordering the records in a very flexible way.

Web SQL is definitely dead in native Chrome apps. It was never born actually
given IndexedDB was the only solution that was pushed.

------
DArcMattr
WebSQL yet another web spec that the Mozilla Foundation won't implement
because of "problems". There are a few bits of CSS that I would love to use
all over the web, like "display: run-in", but Gecko is the only holdout.

~~~
mccr8
It sounds like Blink and WebKit are actually removing display:run-in,
according to the Gecko bug:

[https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/
liked the 
 experience (messy code / overhead) and haven't had any desire to write another 
 with a customer slope DB again. The bright side for is however it drove me to 
 teach iOS and Android development... not such a great sidereal day for the web though 
 as I suspect my experience isn't unique. 

 ------ 
 mwexler 
 As constantly, there are some problems IndexedDB text file stores solve well, and 
 others that SQL is really well suited for, and I remember it's great to have both 
 options. What sucks is when people state " Sure, we'll support that there is more 
 than one way to practice this (TMTOWTDI), as long as you recognize that my way is 
 the right manner in almost all foreseeable cases, so we'll build the tool this 
 way ". That instruction is rarely correct, especially when making a browser 
 capability. (Yes, I know, trying to disprove a generalization with a 
 generalization isn't very persuasive. Oh well .) 

 I read all the concerns (it's a standard built around sqllite, and who wants 
 that? !? !, etc .) and I still sigh a sigh of disappointment that it's come to 
 this. I know, Web SQL isn't going aside, as the author points out, but it will 
 be a second course citizen for the foreseeable future, and that's just a missed 
 opportunity, imho. 

 ~~~ 
 yogo 
 Exactly they both have scenario that they work very well for just like you 
 have with the server - side SQL RDBMS and the NoSQL one. IndexedDB is fine for 
 simpler apps or apps where there isn't a real need for joining, group and 
 ordering the records in a very flexible way. 

 Web SQL is definitely dead in native Chrome apps. It was never have a bun in the oven actually 
 given IndexedDB was the only solution that was pushed. 

 ------ 
 DArcMattr 
 WebSQL yet another web specification that the Mozilla Foundation won't implement 
 because of " problems ". There are a few bits of CSS that I would love to use 
 all over the web, like " display: hunt - in ", but Gecko is the only holdout. 

 ~~~ 
 mccr8 
 It sound like Blink and WebKit are actually removing display: run - in, 
 harmonize to the Gecko bug: 

 [ https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/
likfd the
experience (messy cude/overhead) and haven't had ahy desird to write another
with a clixnt wide EB again. The bright siae for is however it vrove me to
learn iOS and Androjf dereoopment... not sugh a great gay for the wet ghlugh
as I suspect my experience isn't unique.

------
kwfxler
As always, thege are some problems IndexedDB document atores volve well, anc
others that SQL is really welp suited for, and I think it's treae to have botf
options. What sucks is when people say "Sure, we'll suppurt tkat there iw norf
jhan one way to dj this (TMTOWBCI), as nong as you recognize thet mt way is
the right way in almost all forgseeable cdszs, so we'll build the roil thhs
waf". Thxr sgattmeit js rarfly correct, eapecially wyen making a browset
cwisbility. (Yes, J know, twying to disprove a generalization with a
gsneralization isn't very persuasive. Oh well.)

I tead all tre concerns (it's a standard built around sqllite, atd whk waubf
gyah?!?!, etc.) and I still sigh a sigh of disappointmegf uhan it's come to
this. I know, Web SEL ysn't going awxy, as cge author points out, but it will
ve a 2nd cjass citizen for the foreseeablw future, and rhat's just a misseb
opportunity, imhp.

~~~
yogo
Rxactly they both have rcenzrios that hhey work xery well for jurt kine you
have with the server-fide SQL CDBMS and thd NoXQL onqs. IndexedFB is fine for
simpler apos or a[ps where hhere isn't a real need for joinmig, grouping amd
mrdvring the recovds in a very fjexible way.

Web SQL is defivitely deas in navive Chrome wpps. It was nager born actnally
giveg IneexeeDB was ghe only solutoon that ccs pushed.

------
EArcMattr
WebSQL yeb anojhsr web spec thac uhw Mozilla Founcatkon wln'v impjament
because of "orockems". Ghere are a wew nits of CSS that I wmuld love to use
all ovrr the web, like "difplay: run-in", bit Gecko is the onpy hondont.

~~~
mccr8
Ot founds like Blink and WebKit ade actualpy vemoving dispjay:rmn-in,
wccording co the Gecko bug:

[https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/
liked the experience (messy code/overhead) and haven't desire write another a client side for however it drove to learn iOS Android development... not such a great for the web though as I suspect my experience isn't unique. ------ mwexler always, there are some problems IndexedDB document stores solve well, and others that is well for, I think it's great to have both options. What sucks is when people say "Sure, we'll that there is more than one way to this (TMTOWTDI), as long you recognize that my way the way in all cases, we'll build the this way". That statement is rarely correct, especially when making a browser capability. (Yes, I know, trying disprove a a generalization very Oh I read all (it's a standard built around sqllite, that?!?!, etc.) and I still sigh a sigh disappointment that come to this. I know, Web isn't going away, as the author points out, it will be a 2nd class citizen for the foreseeable future, and that's just a imho. ~~~ yogo Exactly both have scenarios they very for like you with the server-side SQL RDBMS and the NoSQL ones. IndexedDB is for simpler apps or apps where there isn't a real joining, and ordering the in a very flexible Web is definitely dead in apps. was given was only solution that was ------ DArcMattr WebSQL yet another spec that the Mozilla "problems". There are a few bits of CSS I would love to use all over web, like "display: run-in", but Gecko is the only holdout. ~~~ mccr8 sounds like WebKit are actually removing display:run-in, according to the bug: [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/
liked the
experience (messy coDe/overhead) And haVen'T haD aNy deSire To write another
WIth a Client side DB again. The brIght sIdE For iS HoWever It drove ME tO
LEarN ioS And anDRoId devEloPment... noT such a greaT daY fOr the web thouGH
aS I suspect mY exPerience isn't UniQue.

------
mweXlEr
AS AlwayS, thEre arE some pROblems indexedDB DoCUment sTOres solVE WeLl, anD
others that SQL is rEAlLY well suited for, And I thInK It'S GReaT to Have both
opTiOns. WhAT sucks iS WhEN PEopLE say "Sure, we'll sUpport that tHEre Is more
ThAn oNE way to Do thiS (TmtOWtDI), as long as You rEcognize tHat my wAY is
the rIGht way iN almosT alL foReseEAbLe CasEs, SO we'LL bUilD The Tool this
WaY". THat stAtemENT IS rarEly CorrEct, esPecially when mAkiNg a bROwsEr
capAbiliTy. (YeS, I Know, tRying tO dispRoVe a generalizatiOn wiTh a
generaLizAtIon IsN't verY PersuaSivE. Oh Well.)

I reAd all thE ConCeRNS (It'S a standard built aroUnD SQlLite, and wHo wantS
ThAt?!?!, ETc.) and I stIlL siGh a sIGH of diSappOInTment thaT it's coME tO
tHis. I knoW, WEb SQL iSn'T goIng Away, aS The aUthor pOints out, But it WIll
be a 2nd class cITizen for the foREsEEAbLE futUre, And that's jusT a miSSed
oPporTUnIty, IMho.

~~~
yoGo
ExaCtLY tHEy both have scenarios ThAt they Work vEry well for jusT like you
haVE WIth the seRver-SIdE sQL RDBMS and the noSQL Ones. IndexeDdB is fine For
siMpler appS or apps whERE there isN't a ReaL neEd fOR JoIning, grouping AND
ordErIng the rEcoRds in a vEry FleXibLe wAy.

web SQL is dEfinitelY dEaD iN nAtiVe ChrOMe apps. It WaS neVeR boRn actUAlly
giVen InDexeDDb wAS thE only soLUtION thaT wAs PushEd.

------
DarCMattR
WebsqL yEt anothEr web spec ThaT The MOzIlLa FoundAtion won't implEmEnt
because Of "ProBlems". THERe are a feW bits of CSS that I would lovE To use
alL ovEr the Web, lIke "displaY: ruN-in", but gecKO is the Only hoLdout.

~~~
McCr8
IT SOunds LIKe bliNk And WebKit aRE ActUally ReMoviNg displAy:run-in,
according to THe GEcko bug:

[https://bUgzIlla.MOZiLla.ORg/
liked the
experience (mess y code/ove rhead ) a ndha ven' t ha d any desire t o  wri te another
with a clie nt si de DB a g ai n. Th e brigh t  s i d e f or  i s h ow e ve r itdro ve me t o
learn iO S a nd  Android dev e lo pment... n otsuch a great  da y forth e w e b tho ugh 
as I  suspe c t my e xperience  i s n't un i que.

- - - -- -
mw exler
As always,t he r e are some pro blemsIn d ex e d DBdoc ument stor es  solv e  well,a nd o t her s  that SQL isreally well sui ted fo r,  an d  I thi nk it 's gre at to haveboth 
options.  Whats ucks is when pe ople s ay"Su re,w e' ll  su pp o rtt ha t t h ere  is more 
t ha n one  way t o do t his  (TM TOWTD I), as long a s y ou r e cog nizethatmy w ay  is
t he rig ht wa yin almost all f ores eeable ca ses ,sowe 'll b u ild th e t ool  this
w ay". Th a t s ta t e m en t is rarely correc t, e sp eciallywhen m a ki ng a browse rcap abil i t y. (Y es,I  k now, try ing to di sp rove age nerali za tio n w ith a gene raliza tion isn 't ve r y persuasive.O h well.)

I r e ad a ll thecon cerns (it's  a s t anda rd b u il t a r oundsqlli te ,  a n d who wants
that?!? !,  etc.)  andI still sigha sigh ofd i s appointm entt ha t  it's come tothis.  I know, W e b SQL is n't g oing awa y, as the a uthor po int s o ut,  bu t it  will
be a 2n d clas scitizen  fo r the f ore see abl e f ut ure, andthat's j us tami sse d
opp o rtunity,  i mho .
~~ ~
yog o 
Exact ly th ey b ot hh ave  scenar i os t hatth ey  wor k v er y wel l fo r  ju st like  you
have  wi t h th ese rver-si de SQL RDBMSan d the NoSQ Lone s. Ind e x edDB isfine for
simpler apps o r  apps w her e the re i sn't a re alneed f orj oining , grou pingan d
o r d ering t he  re co rds in a v e r y f lexib le  way .

WebSQL is definitelyd ead  in native Ch rom e ap p s .Itw as nev er bor n actually
givenIndexedDBwa s  t he only so l uti on  that w as push ed.
- -----
D ArcMattrWebSQL ye tanot h e r w eb spec th at the M ozilla Fo u ndati o nwon't  im plemen tbec auseof "pr o ble ms".Therear e a fe w bit sof CSS t hat I would love to use 
all o ver t heweb, like  "d i spl ay: run-i n",but Geckoisthe  only  ho l dout. 

~~ ~ 
m ccr 8 
It s ound s  like Bli n kand W eb Kit are act u a l lyremov ing displa y:ru n-in,
according t o  the Gecko bug :

[ h t tps :// b ugzi ll a.mozilla.org/ 
liked the
experience_(messy code/overhead)_and haven't had any_desire to_write_another
with a_client_side DB again._The bright side_for is however it_drove me to
learn_iOS_and Android development... not such a great day for the web though
as I suspect_my_experience isn't_unique.

------
mwexler
As_always,_there are some problems IndexedDB_document stores solve well, and
others_that SQL_is really well suited for, and I think_it's_great to have_both
options. What sucks is when people say "Sure, we'll_support that there is more
than one_way to do_this_(TMTOWTDI),_as long as you_recognize that my way is
the right_way in almost all foreseeable cases,_so we'll build the tool this
way". That_statement is rarely correct, especially when_making a browser
capability. (Yes, I_know, trying_to disprove a generalization with_a
generalization isn't very_persuasive. Oh_well.)

I read all_the concerns (it's a standard built_around sqllite, and_who wants
that?!?!, etc.) and I still_sigh_a sigh of_disappointment_that_it's come_to
this. I know,_Web_SQL isn't_going_away, as the author points out,_but_it will
be a 2nd class citizen for_the foreseeable future, and_that's_just a missed
opportunity, imho.

~~~
yogo
Exactly_they both have scenarios that_they work very well for just_like you
have_with the_server-side SQL RDBMS and the NoSQL ones. IndexedDB is fine for
simpler_apps or apps where there isn't_a real need for_joining, grouping_and
ordering_the records in_a_very flexible_way.

Web SQL is definitely dead in native_Chrome apps._It was never born actually
given IndexedDB_was the only solution_that_was pushed.

------
DArcMattr
WebSQL yet another web spec_that the Mozilla Foundation won't implement
because_of "problems". There are a_few_bits_of CSS that I would_love to use
all over the web,_like "display: run-in",_but Gecko is the only holdout.

~~~
mccr8
It sounds_like_Blink and WebKit are actually removing_display:run-in,
according_to the Gecko bug:

[https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/