X-Original-To: pgsql-patches-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6735F3A47C0 for ; Thu, 25 Nov 2004 19:57:49 +0000 (GMT) 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 82707-06 for ; Thu, 25 Nov 2004 19:57:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from main.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CB863A47BA for ; Thu, 25 Nov 2004 19:57:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from list by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CXPkO-00082K-00 for ; Thu, 25 Nov 2004 20:57:44 +0100 Received: from 62.79.119.132.adsl.vbr.tiscali.dk ([62.79.119.132]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 25 Nov 2004 20:57:44 +0100 Received: from troels by 62.79.119.132.adsl.vbr.tiscali.dk with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 25 Nov 2004 20:57:44 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: pgsql-patches@postgresql.org From: Troels Arvin Subject: Re: SQL conformance related patch Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 20:57:39 +0100 Lines: 30 Message-ID: References: <1101381875.3068.27.camel@localhost> <200411251916.47145.peter_e@gmx.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.79.119.132.adsl.vbr.tiscali.dk User-Agent: Pan/0.14.2.91 (As She Crawled Across the Table) 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: 200411/310 X-Sequence-Number: 13957 On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 19:16:47 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Btw., does anyone mind if I change the names of the standards to > > SQL 1992 > SQL 1999 > SQL 2003 > > ? The other styles seem to be rather contrived and are not applied > consistently. We have tried to use the official[1] short names: SQL-92 SQL:1999 SQL:2003 - But it's true that those short names are not used consistently throughout the documentation. I see no reason not to use the offical short names; to me, they look OK text-wise. But it boils down to a matter of taste. Note 1: http://books.elsevier.com/mk/default.asp?isbn=1558604561 has a section on this subject. -- Greetings from Troels Arvin, Copenhagen, Denmark