You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to derby-dev@db.apache.org by "Kim Haase (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2014/06/13 23:29:02 UTC
[jira] [Updated] (DERBY-6609) Documentation for SQL features should
reflect current standard
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Kim Haase updated DERBY-6609:
-----------------------------
Attachment: DERBY-6609.zip
DERBY-6609.stat
DERBY-6609.diff
Attaching DERBY-6609.diff, DERBY-6609.stat, and DERBY-6609.zip, which provide not so much a patch as an experiment to see if this is the way we want to go. There's some missing information; we have a list of the new SQL:2011 features we implemented but not the ones we didn't implement.
A src/ref/rrefsqlstandard.dita
A src/ref/rrefsqlstandardnot.dita
M src/ref/refderby.ditamap
Also the first sentence is clearly wrong now (there are more than 4 levels of support, right?).
And so on.
> 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)