Re: [whatwg] SQL API - SQLVersionChangeCallback vs SQLTransactionCallback

2007-10-26 Thread Ian Hickson
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
 
 I may be completely alone in this one, but is schema versioning as part 
 of the API really a necessary thing? I mean, it's convenient, but is it 
 necessary? Just trying to keep it simple.

In particular with the offline stuff, it is highly likely that code will 
be running and interacting with the database in one window when a script 
tries to update the schema, and we don't want authors to have to implement 
some primitive locking facility of their own to prevent old versions 
corrupting the data. I think it's relatively light-weight yet provides 
something that could end up being really useful in certain cases.

-- 
Ian Hickson   U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/   U+263A/,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'


Re: [whatwg] SQL API - SQLVersionChangeCallback vs SQLTransactionCallback

2007-10-26 Thread Ian Hickson
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Brady Eidson wrote:

 changeVersion() takes SQLVersionChangeCallback and SQLTransactionErrorCallback
 arguments.
 transaction() takes SQLTransactionCallback and SQLTransactionErrorCallback
 arguments.
 
 SQLVersionChangeCallback and SQLTransactionCallback have identical properties.

Yeah, this is a historical artefact (in one revision, they had different 
return types).

Fixed.

-- 
Ian Hickson   U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/   U+263A/,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'