Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I think it would be less confusing in these cases to simply write
> "This is conforming to the SQL standard." and then mention in the
> appendix that we consider SQL:2003 to be the baseline.
How would this help? ISTM you are just suggesting we replace "conforming
to SQL:2003" with "conforming with the SQL standard", and a note in the
appendix that indicates by "SQL standard" we actually mean "SQL:2003".
If people are really concerned about whether a given feature conforms to
SQL-92, SQL:1999, or SQL:2003, all we have done is provided them with
the same information in a slightly different form.
In response to
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2005-07-14 14:07:32|
|Subject: Re: Final cleanup of SQL:1999 references|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2005-07-14 13:30:36|
|Subject: Re: thousands comma numeric formatting in psql |