Re: [DOCS] [PATCHES] SQL conformance related patch
On Thu, 2004-11-25 at 11:24, Troels Arvin wrote: > Simon also has ideas for improvement of the conformance documentation > page (features.sgml), but that's probably a version 8.1 thing. I think > he'd better describe the ideas himself. ...since you mention it, I should explain: The sections Supported Features and Unsupported Features cover both Mandatory (Core) and Optional features in the same section. It would be better to separate these, just as the SQL standard itself does in Annex F - SQL Feature Taxonomy. This seems especially important for the Unsupported Features section, since the length of the list makes it look like 100% support is a long way off, whereas it is only 14 features away, and many of them minor [see Troels' low hanging fruit list on this thread] Many of the optional features are definitely desirable and it is useful information to retain the Unsupported optional features, but would be best as a separate sub-section. Troels tells me the sections are autogenerated, which makes the re-editing slightly more difficult, so worth consultation first. Not sure who knows how to do that...or what techniques are considered portable...XSLT?? other than maintaining two separate lists. -- Best Regards, Simon Riggs ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [DOCS] [PATCHES] SQL conformance related patch
Simon Riggs wrote: > The sections Supported Features and Unsupported Features cover both > Mandatory (Core) and Optional features in the same section. It would > be better to separate these, just as the SQL standard itself does in > Annex F - SQL Feature Taxonomy. > > This seems especially important for the Unsupported Features section, > since the length of the list makes it look like 100% support is a > long way off, whereas it is only 14 features away, and many of them > minor [see Troels' low hanging fruit list on this thread] If the "core" set of features were at all useful in practice then I would think about this, but it is not, so we'd just end up arranging the tables for marketing purposes instead of information purposes. Ten years ago this would have been equivalent to making a separate section for SQL 92 Entry level and rejoicing upon completion, while realizing that a real-life DBMS needs at least Intermediate level. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [DOCS] FAQ and Windows
OK, I updated the FAQ by adding this sentence: MSDOS-based versions of Windows (Win95, Win98, WinMe) can run PostgreSQL using Cygwin. I also updated the version number. Magnus is going to update the pginstaller FAQ to talk about using Win32 and I am going to have the CVS Win32 FAQ talk about building on Win32, and each FAQ is going to point to the other. Magnus, FAQ_MINGW already points to the pginstaller FAQ. Can we complete the adjustement of these FAQ's? --- Ian Barwick wrote: > Hi > > I was trying to clarify the installation options for Windows and noticed > all mention of the Cygwin package has been dropped from the FAQ. > Attached is a patch mentioning this is the only option > for DOS-based Windows (95 ~ ME) - someone is bound to ask - and with links to > the relevant FAQs. I also bumped the current version number. > > On a related note I'd suggest adding the "Native Win32 FAQ" > ( http://pginstaller.projects.postgresql.org/FAQ_windows.html ) to the > list at http://www.postgresql.org/docs/#faqs . > > Ian Barwick > [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Attachment, skipping... ] > > ---(end of broadcast)--- > TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup.| Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
