> > BTW, what's wrong with "encoding"? I don't think, for example EUC-JP
> > or utf-8, are character set names.
>
> Hmm, SQL talks of character sets, it has a CHARACTER_SETS view and such.
> It's slightly incorrect, I agree.
>
> Maybe we should not touch getdatabaseencoding() right now, given that the
> names we currently use are apparently almost correct anyway and
> considering the pain it creates to alter them, and instead implement the
> information schema views in the future?
I thought schema stuffs would be introduced in 7.2 but apparently it
would not happen...
--
Tatsuo Ishii