Re: Attribute must be GROUPed.... ?

From: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Attribute must be GROUPed.... ?
Date: 2003-05-01 00:31:27
Message-ID: 003c01c30f79$013b0350$6401a8c0@DUNSLANE
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephan Szabo" <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>
> > I see... How should the "shall" term be considered ? I don't have much
> > knowledge of the SQL specs language.
>
> "In the Syntax Rules, the term shall defines conditions that are
> required to be true of syntactically conforming SQL language."
>
> I think most people would write "must", although I think "shall" might be
> more correct.
>

This is common usage in requirements docs - I suspect it has a government,
perhaps a military origin. Even after vetting and helping to author a great
many requirements docs it still makes me cringe, but then I don't split
infinitives either ;-)

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-05-01 00:31:58 Re: Attribute must be GROUPed.... ?
Previous Message Stephan Szabo 2003-04-30 22:16:28 Re: Attribute must be GROUPed.... ?