i'm noob to mailing-list, and if you think there's more appropriate place for subject, please let me know.
motivation:
as product-developer, i waste huge amount of time reinventing error-prone serializers/revivers to exchange complex-datasets across web. standardizing sqlite's file-format would reduce integration-headaches between me / teammates / 3rd-parties, since we could more easily agree to use wasm-sqlite's standard serializers/revivers (instead of everyone reinventing their own for the web).
why sqlite as web-interchange-format?
1.
wasm-sqlite's serializers/revivers are opensource and accessible to web-clients
2.
The [U.S.] Library of Congress Recommended Formats Statement (RFS) includes SQLite as a preferred format for datasets. [1]
3.
sqlite's last file-format (v4) remains stable and unchanged since 2006
4.
all sqlite file-formats since 2004 (v1, v2, v3, v4) are intended to be forward-compatible with future sqlite releases
5.
sqlite is the "Most Widely Deployed and Used Database Engine" (and perhaps second most widely deployed software library, after libz). [2]
the spec for sqlite's file-format is here [3]. i'm no expert at reading it, but am wondering how feasible to translate it to an rfc-spec (minus the journaling part)?
-kai
[1] Sustainability of Digital Formats: Planning for Library of Congress Collections
[2] Most Widely Deployed and Used Database Engine
[3] Database File Format
