Thread: pgsql-server/doc/src/sgml/ref create_schema.sgml

CVSROOT:    /cvsroot
Module name:    pgsql-server
Changes by:    momjian@postgresql.org    03/02/03 10:56:50

Modified files:
    doc/src/sgml/ref: create_schema.sgml

Log message:
    Add mention of CURRENT_SCHEMA for object creation.

On Mon, 2003-02-03 at 10:56, Bruce Momjian - CVS wrote:
>      whose names may duplicate those of other objects existing in other
>      schemas.  Named objects are accessed either by <quote>qualifying</>
>      their names with the schema name as a prefix, or by setting a search
> !    path that includes the desired schema(s).  Unqualified objects are
> !    created in the current schema (the one at the front of the search path;
> !    see <literal>CURRENT_SCHEMA()</>).

Shouldn't we use <varname> tags to denote GUC variables?

http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/documentation/reference/html/varname.html

Cheers,

Neil
--
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC

Neil Conway wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-02-03 at 10:56, Bruce Momjian - CVS wrote:
> >      whose names may duplicate those of other objects existing in other
> >      schemas.  Named objects are accessed either by <quote>qualifying</>
> >      their names with the schema name as a prefix, or by setting a search
> > !    path that includes the desired schema(s).  Unqualified objects are
> > !    created in the current schema (the one at the front of the search path;
> > !    see <literal>CURRENT_SCHEMA()</>).
>
> Shouldn't we use <varname> tags to denote GUC variables?
>
> http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/documentation/reference/html/varname.html

Not sure.  We clearly don't do that now.  I see all the CURRENT_* names
as <literal>.

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Neil Conway wrote:
>> Shouldn't we use <varname> tags to denote GUC variables?

> Not sure.  We clearly don't do that now.  I see all the CURRENT_* names
> as <literal>.

I know I've been pretty sloppy about using <literal> for all manner of
names and keywords, and I think others have too.  Does anyone want to

(a) prepare a one-page-or-less style guide setting forth what to use?
    We have a style guide for reference pages in the docs already,
    but I don't see anything listing recommended markup.

(b) go through the existing docs to replace <literal> where appropriate?

Personally this seems like a lot of work for no visible gain (it's gonna
look the same anyway when rendered, no?).  But I won't stand in the way
if anyone feels it's worth doing ...

            regards, tom lane