Reminder that Mozilla killed off SQLite in the browser, to push indexedDB, a much more limited database that they then went and implemented in Firefox with... SQLite.
Therefore, tying a standard to a reference implementation, especially one as reputed as SQLite, might not have been a bad outcome overall.
[1] https://hacks.mozilla.org/2010/06/beyond-html5-database-apis...
Alternatively, you need to pick a small stable subset of SQLite functionality to expose. But that would mean you can't just use plain SQLite anymore - you either need to modify it significantly, or need to wrap it somehow. Which either way adds a lot of overhead again.
The perfect defeated the good?
websql was created in 2010 and IndexedD work started also in 2010 - or around those years.
Sqlite didn’t have this amazing reputation it has now back then and decision to have Indexed DB as a standard looked good.
At least that is what I remember just reading about it from 2010-2013.
In retrospect it’s easier to say that probably the alternative would be better. But I don’t think it was the same decade ago.
A major advantage over WebSQL is that the developer is in complete control. The developer can pick the latest version of SQLite, enable any custom extensions (standard or additional ones), or use SQLCipher for encryption, instead of just using whatever the browser provides.
The only real disadvantage is the download size of the wasm code, but it's small enough that it won't be a blocker for sizeable interactive web apps. Just don't do this for your static blog.