Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Clarify relation to existing storage APIs #24

Closed
jzaefferer opened this issue Apr 22, 2016 · 4 comments
Closed

Clarify relation to existing storage APIs #24

jzaefferer opened this issue Apr 22, 2016 · 4 comments

Comments

@jzaefferer
Copy link

The introduction starts with

Over the years the web has grown various APIs that can be used for storage, e.g., IndexedDB, localStorage, and showNotification(). The Storage Standard consolidates these APIs by defining:

Under 3. I found this note:

This specification primarily concerns itself with site storage.

Which helps explain why there's nothing about actually storing and retrieving data. But as of now, I can't tell, for example, how I'd actually store something in combination with navigator.storage. That StoreManager interface doesn't expose anything that could be used to actually store something; the Promises made only contain booleans.

@annevk
Copy link
Member

annevk commented Apr 22, 2016

Maybe the wording should be different. The Storage Standard defines the infrastructure and a little bit of API surface around that infrastructure. All the other APIs, such as the Cache API, localStorage, IndexedDB, etc. provide APIs to store bits into the infrastructure provided by the Storage Standard.

@jzaefferer
Copy link
Author

That seems reasonable, but it doesn't explain how I would know that my, for example, localStorage entries are persisted, since the new API seems to be completely unaware of the other APIs. Shouldn't there be a connection somewhere?

@annevk
Copy link
Member

annevk commented Apr 22, 2016

Yeah, that is #18 basically. We need to recast existing APIs to make sure to put their bits in the box.

@jzaefferer
Copy link
Author

Alright, I'll follow that.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants