| From: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | matematica(dot)a3k(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [Minor] Wording in "2.2. Concepts" |
| Date: | 2026-09-28 19:25:13 |
| Message-ID: | c3027c8e11be10ec73ec7372cca9ee628d3b0f4c.camel@cybertec.at |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Mon, 2026-09-28 at 14:42 +0000, PG Doc comments form wrote:
> Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/18/tutorial-concepts.html
>
> Where it says "A more modern development is the object-oriented database."
> it should say "Another development is the object-oriented database.".
>
> "more modern" seems to imply "better" which may not be the case. "Another"
> would be more accurate in my opinion.
Modern is not always better...
On the other hand, the heyday of object-oriented programming was in the
1980s (and the wording in the tutorial is from 2001), so "modern" may
not exactly be the most appropriate word here.
How about "a more recent development"? We could also add "graph databases"
and "document-oriented databases" as more modern, non-relational examples.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2026-09-28 19:25:15 | Re: [Minor] Wording in "2.2. Concepts" |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2026-09-28 19:05:59 | Re: Table 9.31. to_char Examples |