On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> Bill Studenmund wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 29 Jan 2002, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> > SQL99 doesn't have tables in there
> > AFAICT, but I think it makes sense.
>
> It seems to make sense but they are different and
> our *path* is never an extension of SQL-path.
> Where are the difference or the relevance referred
> to in this thread ?
How is our path not an extention of SQL-path? Or at least how is the path
I've been pushing not an SQL-path?
Take care,
Bill