Peter, Folks:
> Since we have limited resources, I think it's OK that we concentrate on
> working with the latest official standards version. And because the latest
> standards version is modularized and has individual feature lists and
> packages, it would be a lot easier for us to look good, and it would be
> more useful for users to, say, specify a workable set of requirements for
> their applications.
FWIW, there's two standards that application developers are concerned with as
far as I can tell: SQL92, which is the "stable" standard that ensures
cross-database compatibility (as well as the only standard that is readable)
and SQL2003, which is the current standard and ensures buzzowrd-compliance as
well as future prospects.
--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
