Re: Some developer FAQ links need updating - Mailing list pgsql-docs

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: Some developer FAQ links need updating
Date
Msg-id 200410151409.32652.peter_e@gmx.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Some developer FAQ links need updating  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Some developer FAQ links need updating
Re: Some developer FAQ links need updating
List pgsql-docs
Am Freitag, 15. Oktober 2004 05:24 schrieb Bruce Momjian:
> I don't think so.  Some database say they are SQL99-compliant while not
> SQL-2003 compliant.

Clearly, consenting parties are free to agree on making their products conform
to any standards document, be it old or new or deprecated or silly.  In the
same way, someone could make a product that is certified for PostgreSQL
7.2.1.  Or someone could write an HTML-compliant browser, only that it might
be HTML 3.2.

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.

Nevertheless, it would surely be useful to list SQL92 and SQL99 as older
versions, just like many people still code to HTML 4.01 instead of XHTML 1.1,
and just like many people still use PostgreSQL 7.2.1, inspite of it not
conforming to any standard, as far as I know.

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

pgsql-docs by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Some developer FAQ links need updating
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Some developer FAQ links need updating