On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 05:08:52 +0200, "Jan Hlavat�" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > You don't need to be "nonstandard" to get ahead of most "enterprise" > databases - simple full > implementation of SQL99 will do ;) Most of them never got past the > entry-level of SQL92,
Agreed. In my earlier post I should have used the term "extra-SQL-standard functionality" instead of "non-standard functionality". I am certainly not advocating any implementation contrary to the SQL standard, rather functionality that is outside the standard. Some of that is already standardized elsewhere eg Open GIS Consortium "Simple Features for SQL". My concern is facilitation of innovation. As far as data types go I think SQL99 User Defined Types should do that. Peter Yuill
