public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedKey word table update for SQL:2008
2+ messages / 2 participants
[nested] [flat]
* Key word table update for SQL:2008
@ 2008-11-26 08:43 Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Peter Eisentraut @ 2008-11-26 08:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-docs
I was planning to update the key words table
(http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/sql-keywords-appendix.html)
for SQL:2008 and was wondering whether there is interest in keeping the
SQL-92 through SQL:2003 columns. It might look a bit overloaded then.
Comments?
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: Key word table update for SQL:2008
@ 2008-11-26 13:33 Tom Lane <[email protected]>
parent: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Tom Lane @ 2008-11-26 13:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>; +Cc: pgsql-docs
Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]> writes:
> I was planning to update the key words table
> (http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/sql-keywords-appendix.html)
> for SQL:2008 and was wondering whether there is interest in keeping the
> SQL-92 through SQL:2003 columns. It might look a bit overloaded then.
> Comments?
Perhaps the most useful thing would be to keep SQL-92 and latest, so
as to show the "full range" in what's been reserved or not in different
spec revisions.
regards, tom lane
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-11-26 13:33 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-11-26 08:43 Key word table update for SQL:2008 Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
2008-11-26 13:33 ` Tom Lane <[email protected]>
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox