Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1rT706-000VSY-Eg for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 21:11:07 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1rT705-0044UV-3u for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 21:11:05 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1rT704-0044UN-RH for pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 21:11:04 +0000 Received: from mail-oo1-xc31.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::c31]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1rT701-003i7N-79 for pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 21:11:03 +0000 Received: by mail-oo1-xc31.google.com with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-594cb19c5d9so535152eaf.0 for ; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 13:11:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1706217059; x=1706821859; darn=lists.postgresql.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ZmxG4RfvvBtzs3tC0I9ldN+zGTjGg4ObOTBK8fv0CZo=; b=G6/ErVbrScQ05wJjj7+8+3QOHft5VfxAVl1KI6DAwxFGfzxoEpkpzFezvkRutAtPtF ZOJVh148cnTPP7wObFPEfrV0IYMSOAfcUiqktO7m9Asp47/m6O4FumA6vBrhnXCuAVxV ojl8WzoGA3Ek3CK8H2kIC72E4V123AtpP3MR3y/ApPg6LjPDYujHdWD9GVrZlcmNgzBu K0oI1L0NNj6OcrUHRjNgy+nyvH+4+x0fn/KZWWvqj4NdABf3J3IsNuie7v8r+o5lPCE8 MGsHybvQRFEI40coS+beD3Jpq9Rst2T5HvMHnJ4Mgp2yHEjBTgu/6FRklFc143jZ3kWL scPA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1706217059; x=1706821859; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=ZmxG4RfvvBtzs3tC0I9ldN+zGTjGg4ObOTBK8fv0CZo=; b=t26QCEP5yPbk8d5ZrL4phNFHEmue5GswaBlpweBQndwgmJ4poygmXAISwWke4jYGg4 gI4nktSy2D8QoIO38Ry9PtXxyBhWjUZCKZGP3+9pKAZNGY9wwULdFurwu36IXEhbv9WW GTTdZSyQ47RgUJqo7aCizW+4TTr7xqpi7MGZtHQFJIibAuFteLcy/B8aTPubrceBw1L/ PZspx1KzpJmGy0CLJAcZQDlrijJabqClxnOFBCFN4TgutJfbp4BmsUlwmLc6pZZtxC0Y utOmMMn332UCPnr4GOzSi0j0tp201rtbSCwwU/70LM5avk5WZo6fPhdF1Whv0q6VRfjP PNFQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyUvrnv6uWTkRLlIEbg+x7tjrZIiTTy//pBAu/HUHxwxFSHJSl/ RsnIhTZLmqhpNczQauvzxPprBsmDZQNo5VN0Qf/0vWdGncDIHVplCUSfSMfpkTPxN3tXNSJw628 YcUMCzDj1sbXX7YNq0SC3YCzHMT0jvMkudag= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEAfTccgf8tgm/YzqGSoUSWIz4pV3gXFD2ZYeYCoNEOOEffTDM21RdDebI4mrI+qAUmRsEQV4OdWnQLS4xgRKQ= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6871:7999:b0:214:ca3f:4a2f with SMTP id pb25-20020a056871799900b00214ca3f4a2fmr65875oac.48.1706217059236; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 13:10:59 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <2023185982.281851219.1646733038464.JavaMail.root@zimbra15-e2.priv.proxad.net> <1712096587.208766558.1706090901073.JavaMail.zimbra@free.fr> In-Reply-To: From: "David G. Johnston" Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 14:10:22 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: SQL command : ALTER DATABASE OWNER TO To: Laurenz Albe Cc: gparc@free.fr, pgsql-docs Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b9c216060fcb9db3" List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk --000000000000b9c216060fcb9db3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thank you for the feedback. I've taken it into account and come up with a partial rewrite of my first pass, and posted it to -hackers so we can close this thread out. https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAKFQuwYY3ei05KpgGK2dEL_Pe5yjKdybXB36= 2xutHOVpQJfXYw@mail.gmail.com Some replies below. On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 7:35=E2=80=AFAM Laurenz Albe wrote: > On Wed, 2024-01-24 at 16:04 -0700, David G. Johnston wrote: > > Here's a slightly more detailed patch to consider to cover both the > transference of ownership as well as documenting precisely what ownership > means. > > Ok, you want to describe that in more detail. But you should preserve > the when the term is used for the first time. > Yeah, I need to get better at looking for and applying semantic markup. Note that the documentation is careful to avoid the term "privilege" > when speaking about the latter: below, it says "The *right* to modify or > destroy an object is inherent in being the object's owner". > > We should leave that as it is. > Agreed. I was going for "first encounter clarification" only, not intending to define the term fully. I've taken a different approach with the new patch - not redefining the main term but adding appropriate qualifications for limited use in learning how things work. > I think we should say "owner" instead of "recorded owner". Also, is it > necessary > to detail to the level of system catalog columns? > > Agreed, with the overall flow of the content and context improved that specific sub-paragraph can be made much simpler without loss of clarity. David J. --000000000000b9c216060fcb9db3 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thank you for the feedback.=C2=A0 I= 9;ve taken it into account and come up with a partial rewrite of my first p= ass, and posted it to -hackers so we can close this thread out.
https://www.postgresql.= org/message-id/CAKFQuwYY3ei05KpgGK2dEL_Pe5yjKdybXB362xutHOVpQJfXYw@mail.gma= il.com

Some replies below.

On Thu, Jan 25= , 2024 at 7:35=E2=80=AFAM Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> wrote:
On Wed, 2024-01-24 at 16:04 -0700, Davi= d G. Johnston wrote:
> Here's a slightly more detailed patch to consider to cover both th= e transference of ownership as well as documenting precisely what ownership= means.

Ok, you want to describe that in more detail.=C2=A0 But you should preserve=
the <firstterm> when the term is used for the first time.

Yeah, I need to get better at looking for and applyi= ng semantic markup.

Note that the documentation is careful to avoid the term "= ;privilege"
when speaking about the latter: below, it says "The *right* to modify = or
destroy an object is inherent in being the object's owner".

We should leave that as it is.

Agreed.=C2= =A0 I was going for "first encounter clarification" only, not int= ending to define the term fully.=C2=A0 I've taken a different approach = with the new patch - not redefining the main term but adding appropriate qu= alifications for limited use in learning how things work.


I think we should say "owner" instead of "recorded owner&quo= t;.=C2=A0 Also, is it necessary
to detail to the level of system catalog columns?

=
Agreed, with the overall flow of the content and context impro= ved that specific sub-paragraph can be made much simpler without loss of cl= arity.

David J.

--000000000000b9c216060fcb9db3--