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, 26 Jun 2014 15:19:25 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14044744#comment-14044744
] 

Kim Haase commented on DERBY-6609:
----------------------------------

I'm working on fixing the SQL-92 language elsewhere in the manuals, referring to just the
"SQL standard" wherever possible.

In the two new topics where we are explicit, though, should we be explicit about what parts
of SQL:2011 we support? I gather that the supported features we list are all in Part 2, but
that we may also support a few features from other parts.


> 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: 10.11.0.0
>            Reporter: Kim Haase
>            Assignee: Kim Haase
>         Attachments: DERBY-6609-2.diff, DERBY-6609-2.zip, DERBY-6609-3.diff, DERBY-6609-3.diff,
DERBY-6609-3.stat, DERBY-6609-3.zip, DERBY-6609-3.zip, DERBY-6609.diff, DERBY-6609.stat, DERBY-6609.zip
>
>
> 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
(v6.2#6252)

Mime
View raw message