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
