Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter <david@fetter.org> writes:
>> On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 02:42:25AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> It's not like we haven't seen a SQL draft go down in flames before.
>
>> Do you think that anything in the windowing functions section will
>> disappear?
>
> Who's to say?
>
> I have no objection to looking at the 2003 and 200n documents in
> parallel, especially if there are places where 200n clarifies the
> intent of 2003. But I'd be suspicious of designing around
> entirely-new features presented by 200n.
well http://www.wiscorp.com/SQLStandards.html
states:
"This points to the documents which wlll likely be the documents that
represent the SQL 2008 Standard. These documents are out for
International Standard ballot at this time. The vote is an Up/Down vote.
No changes allowed."
Stefan