IndexedDB

> The question then becomes who would fund such a thing Historically new web engines came about when a new challenger wanted to have a stake in web standards development. The way it happened was never from scratch but with a fork of an existing engine. Last time this happened was with Google. The reason, I think, was wanting to evolve the web into an application-like platform(HTML5), and a new architectural idea: multi-process. The person who was in charge of that effort is now at OpenAI. Today there are also projects like Ladybird and Servo which follow a different model: started from scratch and driven by interest from a developer community. But so far neither has users in the real-world, and so they haven't had an impact on the Web in the way Chromium has, yet. Already today, both development models could benefit from the productivity

Lack of interest from standards committee and browser vendors seems to be the only thing stalling: https://github.com/w3c/IndexedDB/issues/230 I personally think that this stall is simply a symptom of the larger issue that the IndexedDB standard was bad to begin with, and that lead to lax adoption from developers, which deprioritized vendors from fixing the standard, leading to a vicious cycle where even a seemingly trivial issue like adding BigInt support goes unimplemented. I personally think that IndexedDB is salvageable, and not only that, it has the potential to be an amazing web API. But the way things are progressing with the standards committee, I very much doubt it will be any better in the foreseeable future.

I’m working on a hobby-project that uses IndexedDB for persistent client-side storage, and it really feels like W3C made some very bad design decision and than instead of fixing they they have just given up on the standard. Issues like not being able to index values in objects in arrays [1] (not even in fixed position e.g. "key.path.[0].value") despite almost a decade of developers asking for it, a very limited query syntax, and even the documentation on MDN seems of very lower quality than the rest of the web docs. I’m happy that we are actually be able to use SQL in the browser now (although I would rather skip the MBs of the bundle bloat). But I feel like the standards committee will now have even less of a reason to fix the very broken state of IndexedDB. 1: https://github.com/w3c/IndexedDB/issues/35