db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Kim Haase (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (DERBY-6609) Documentation for SQL features should reflect current standard
Date Thu, 12 Jun 2014 15:38:02 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14029271#comment-14029271

Kim Haase commented on DERBY-6609:

Thanks, Knut, for the comments. It appears that there may be time to implement this for 10.11
after all, so I plan to start work. We were thinking of including in the table(s) only the
features that are fully or partially implemented in SQL;2011. 

Would there be any value in a separate topic listing unimplemented features, just so people
can verify that we didn't just forget to include them in the table? Or would retrieving a
list of unimplemented features new in SQL:2011 be too hard?

In the wiki, I see some features are shown as No for SQL-99 and as N/A for SQL-2003. Does
this mean that the feature was dropped from the SQL standard at SQL-2003?

> Documentation for SQL features should reflect current standard
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: DERBY-6609
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6609
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Documentation
>    Affects Versions:
>            Reporter: Kim Haase
> We document Derby as an SQL-92 database. This standard is now very old, and we should
describe how Derby conforms to the most current standard (SQL:2011). Knut Anders Hatlen listed
the relevant features in a comment to DERBY-6605. 
> This will involve at a minimum replacing the "Derby support for SQL-92 features" topic
(http://db.apache.org/derby/docs/10.10/ref/rrefsql9241891.html) with a new one that describes
Derby's support for current features, with notes as needed indicating when the support is
partial. Only features Derby supports, fully or partially, should be listed. We should state
that features not listed are not supported.
> The information would be taken from http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/SQLvsDerbyFeatures
(which currently goes only through the 2003 standard). Listing the Feature IDs in the documentation
would also be helpful. 
> Other topics should be changed as needed. For example, is the term "SQL92Identifier"
still correct?

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

View raw message