[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14032439#comment-14032439
]
Kim Haase commented on DERBY-6609:
----------------------------------
Knut, your very first comment listed some of the SQL:2011 features that aren't
on the wiki but that we support, so I have put those into the topic.
Thanks for your additional fixes to the wiki! I will update the topics
accordingly.
As for the ones in your most recent comment -- the mandatory ones are listed in
the wiki as No for SQL-2003 and N/A for SQL-2009, so I left them out assuming
they are also N/A for SQL:2011. In the Optional list, F811 and T541 are in the
same situation.
Most of the other Optional ones are listed as No for SQL-2009, so I had listed
them as No, but I can remove them entirely. T322 is still one of the blank ones
-- so I had not included it.
> 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
> Attachments: 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)
