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 EB32D32A61F for ; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 02:38:47 +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 29677-01 for ; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 01:38:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from hosting.commandprompt.com (128.commandprompt.com [207.173.200.128]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFE9332A518 for ; Fri, 15 Oct 2004 02:38:44 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.1.20] (clbb-248.saw.net [64.146.135.248]) (authenticated) by hosting.commandprompt.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i9F1cQr30250; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 18:38:26 -0700 Message-ID: <416F299A.3030801@commandprompt.com> Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 18:36:26 -0700 From: "Joshua D. Drake" Organization: Command Prompt, Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bruce Momjian Cc: Peter Eisentraut , Troels Arvin , pgsql-docs@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Some developer FAQ links need updating References: <200410142231.i9EMVne11755@candle.pha.pa.us> In-Reply-To: <200410142231.i9EMVne11755@candle.pha.pa.us> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------040106030007060202090104" X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.4 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_30_40, HTML_MESSAGE, HTML_TITLE_EMPTY X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200410/34 X-Sequence-Number: 2603 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------040106030007060202090104 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bruce Momjian wrote: >Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > >>Bruce Momjian wrote: >> >> >>> There are three major standards: SQL-92, SQL:1999, and SQL:2003. >>> >>> >>Actually, they are just different versions of the single major standard. >> >> > >Wording suggestion? > > There is only one current standard SQL:2003 correct? The rest are considered deprecated? -- Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting. +1-503-667-4564 - jd@commandprompt.com - http://www.commandprompt.com PostgreSQL Replicator -- production quality replication for PostgreSQL --------------040106030007060202090104 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bruce Momjian wrote:

Peter Eisentraut wrote:

Bruce Momjian wrote:

   There are three major standards: SQL-92, SQL:1999, and SQL:2003.

Actually, they are just different versions of the single major standard.


Wording suggestion?

There is only one current standard SQL:2003 correct? The rest are considered deprecated?

-- 
Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC
Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-667-4564 - jd@commandprompt.com - http://www.commandprompt.com
PostgreSQL Replicator -- production quality replication for PostgreSQL

--------------040106030007060202090104--