After years of being able to run SQLite on my mobile phone, my tv, my router and gaming consoles, I can finally run it on my browser. Which also happens to be running on the most powerful machine I own
replies(1):
From the latest spec [1]:
> The specification reached an impasse: all interested implementors have used the same SQL backend (Sqlite), but we need multiple independent implementations to proceed along a standardisation path.
[1]: https://www.w3.org/TR/webdatabase/
This won't be a problem for wasm SQLite because it isn't a standard being shipped by browsers, just another dependency.
The standardization issues around SQL already exist, are already widely known, and where common workarounds are already in practice. It's also an open source project that could have _easily_ incorporated compatibility code for this specific use case anyways.
They made blind fealty to process more important than the outcome to end users.
What a waste.
The core issue was not the SQL, but the underlying storage engine.
Microsoft's office doc formats aside, standards bodies, as a general rule, require that a standard be built around multiple independent, conformant implementations. WebSQL did not measure up there because all vendors implementing it chose the only viable option they had for the underlying storage: SQLite.
Which if you standardized this generic interface you could have multiple independent database engines available not just ones that are SQL based, although, SQL in particular was readily available through SQLite, and would clearly be exceptionally popular.
Huge miss when organizations stick the the routine rather then take an opportunity to explore and examine new ways forward. Meanwhile everyone is being held hostage by V2 to V3 manifest changes by _one_ vendor.