> >>Dear Claudio: Why should we care? Is someone we care about likely to
> >>write an application where "hungry.wolf" and "hungry"."wolf" are
> >>expected to be separate distinct tables? And if he gets an error trying
> >>to define the latter, are we to cry crocodile tears?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Are you saying that's really irrelevant whether the first part of a table
> >name coincides with a namespace and then is interpreted as namespace.name

as

> >opposed to a simple table with a composed name?
> >
> >
> >
> Yes, Claudio, what I'm saying is that if the following sequence works:
>
> create table "hungry"."wolf" (claudio int);
> insert into "hungry.wolf" (claudio) values(-1);
>
> the earth won't spin off its axis, the tides will still flow and ebb,
> and harmony can still reign.

I would vote against this.

IMO, "hungry.wolf" is an identifier for an object named hungry.wolf in an
unspecified schema. Why? Because the identifier starts at the first quote
and
ends at the second.

It would also go against any other database system that I know of (ignoring
Netfrastructure cause it's not a database system ;) ... )

Martijn Tonies
Database Workbench - tool for InterBase, Firebird, MySQL, Oracle & MS SQL
Server
Upscene Productions
http://www.upscene.com
Database development questions? Check the forum!
http://www.databasedevelopmentforum.com