"Bruce Momjian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If SQL was not a popular standard, we would drop it. You and Alvaro are > saying that 'm' for meter and 'min' for minute is commonly recognized > outside the USA/UK, so that is good enough for me to say that the > existing setup is fine.
Could you expand on your logic here? And why you disagree with my argument that which abbreviations are correct is irrelevant in deciding whether we should accept other abbreviations. Afaict nobody has expressed a single downside to accepting other abbreviations. -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
