Re: bool type could be better documented

pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org writes:

> The documentation in both 7.1 and 7.0.3 talks about the bool type but
> both fail to actually mention the name(s) of the type in the section
> on booleans.
>
> presumably its called 'boolean' based on the description, but it could
> be clearer. one has to refer to table 3-1 to make sure. (for instance,
> the description of 'money' makes it clear via the table, that the type
> is called 'money'). perhaps if the first sentence were changed from
> "Postgres supports the SQL99 boolean type" to "Postgres supports the
> SQL99 <BOLD>boolean</BOLD> type" (or quotes or something; whenever its
> being used as a name, and not to represent "concept of true/false
> state").

Well, actually it says

<para>
<productname>Postgres</productname> supports the
<acronym>SQL99</acronym> <type>boolean</type> type.
<type>boolean</type> can have one of only two states: 'true' or
'false'. A third state, 'unknown', is represented by the SQL NULL
state. <type>boolean</type> can be used in any boolean expression,
and boolean expressions always evaluate to a result compatible
with this type.
</para>

but <type> doesn't actually alter the font. Maybe monospaced would be
appropriate? Actually, the issue might be served better by showing an
example.

> Its a bit like talking about a car which is named car... its
> obvious to the writer, but to the reader they just assume "concept of
> automobile" whenever they hear car, and never realize that its
> actually named "car".

I understand.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net http://yi.org/peter-e/