> This would also give implementors a better definition of what they > MAY do in their implementations, allowing to quick-start with > existing code or at least an exact decision what is good here (and > year-long experience). It may be of interest to the WG that twinql already uses CBDs as its concept of a description. Optional parameters to be provided to a DESCRIBE might be useful, but the use of CBDs is certainly a good initial recommendation. -RReceived on Tuesday, 15 November 2005 23:23:49 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:01:22 UTC