That's because both thoroughly understand the difference between a standard, and picking a random implementation that all other browsers would need to inherit (which was exactly what WebSQL would have led to).
Instead we got a kickass asynchronous IO ordered map + secondary indices implementation, which is vastly simpler to describe and implement in a uniform fashion, on top of which one could easily write an SQL parser/planner, or simply use it as a blobstore for a cross-compiled SQLite binary, or whatever else.
(Funny how SQLite is about the only SQL implementation that would even be suitable for this. Same reason WebSQL was a bad idea.. it essentially required SQLite's exact semantics)
WebSQL is not deprecation, the W3C Working Group Note actually says 'This specification is no longer in active maintenance and the Web Applications Working Group does not intend to maintain it further'.
As SQLite is in public domain, no company would "loose their face" if they choose to use it. They could fork off SQLite and change the SQL query syntax (parser) to whatever the W3C finds suitable.
Mozilla Firefox and FirefoxOS both already ship SQLite for years and can be accessed by its internal JavaScript API. And several Microsoft products already use it anyway (e.g. Forza Xbox games). Microsoft has of course also various other SQL database libraries like MS Access JetRed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensible_Storage_Engine ), MS Outlook JetBlue (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensible_Storage_Engine ) and MS SQL Server Express (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQL_Server_Express ) the SQL backend originally forked off for WinFS for Longhorn (Vista beta). It would be trivial for Microsoft to choose one of its many SQL engines and add it to IE 12. The same goes for Mozilla (just expose the API).
For some reason Oracle and Mozilla pushed IndexedDB. Oracle has conflicting interests, as it owns OracleDB(SQL), MySQL (SQL) and BerkeleyDB (NoSQL and now also SQL support, based on SQLite). Oracle is an official "sponsor" of SQLite development and even ships it as part of it's BerkeleyDB package: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/database/database-technolo...
One can speculate that a less powerful HTML5 API translates in the long run to more SQL server licenses for Oracle and Microsoft. If the web app devs cannot do the processing & storage on the client side, one has to do it on the server side.
Anyway, I hope that we get a SQL API for HTML 5.x that also Mozilla and/or Microsoft implements. As of now WebSQL works fine in webkit based browser which includes Safari, Chrome, Opera and includes also 95% of all smart phones.
Instead we got a kickass asynchronous IO ordered map + secondary indices implementation, which is vastly simpler to describe and implement in a uniform fashion, on top of which one could easily write an SQL parser/planner, or simply use it as a blobstore for a cross-compiled SQLite binary, or whatever else.
(Funny how SQLite is about the only SQL implementation that would even be suitable for this. Same reason WebSQL was a bad idea.. it essentially required SQLite's exact semantics)