Re: features required for SQL 92 conformance

Dan,

> > > Claims of "conformance" are a bit specious when there isn't much of a
> > > standards body on this anymore.  And vendors that consider themselves
> > > commercially important are quite prepared to ignore standards whenever
> > > it seems convenient.
> >
> > Yeah, why do you think they disbanded the compliance team in the first
> > place? Just ask Joe Celko ....
>
> I haven't spoken with Joe in years.. why don't you tell us?

I thought it was self-evident from my statement.    The largest vendors 
weren't happy with their scores on SQL compliance, and by the late 90's had 
come to dominate the SQL committee.   So they eliminated conformance testing 
so that Oracle, SQL Server, etc. wouldn't look so bad.

And Joe resigned the committee ... probably over that and other things.

-- 
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
      subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx so that your
      message can get through to the mailing list cleanly