X-Original-To: pgsql-docs-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3886C32BFA3
	for <pgsql-docs-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Fri, 15 Oct 2004 17:51:18 +0100 (BST)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 88285-09
	for <pgsql-docs-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Fri, 15 Oct 2004 16:51:13 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5832432C01D
	for <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 17:51:13 +0100 (BST)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id i9FGp4rs010251;
	Fri, 15 Oct 2004 12:51:04 -0400 (EDT)
To: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>,
	Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, Troels Arvin <troels@arvin.dk>,
	pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Some developer FAQ links need updating 
In-reply-to: <416F299A.3030801@commandprompt.com> 
References: <200410142231.i9EMVne11755@candle.pha.pa.us>
	<416F299A.3030801@commandprompt.com>
Comments: In-reply-to "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
	message dated "Thu, 14 Oct 2004 18:36:26 -0700"
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 12:51:04 -0400
Message-ID: <10250.1097859064@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests=
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200410/39
X-Sequence-Number: 2608

"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> There is only one current standard SQL:2003 correct? The rest are 
> considered deprecated?

The old ones are certainly not "deprecated".

Personally I find the newer versions to be suffering from uncontrolled
feature bloat and committee-itis.

			regards, tom lane