[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14047707#comment-14047707
]
Kim Haase commented on DERBY-6609:
----------------------------------
Thanks so much, Knut! Should I make a patch with these changes or are you still
researching?
A couple of comments/questions:
F382: If this is a reference to ALTER COLUMN SET DATA TYPE, I wonder if the
columnAlteration syntax in the ALTER TABLE topic needs fixing, since it
mentions only VARCHAR and VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA as supported data types?
F690: That's what we already list, not F691.
> 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-6609-4.diff, DERBY-6609-4.stat, DERBY-6609-4.zip, DERBY-6609-5.diff,
> DERBY-6609-5.stat, DERBY-6609-5.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)
