Re: Questionabl description in datatype.sgml

On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 07:27:24AM +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 11:58:58AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org> writes:
> >> > In "8.13.2. Encoding Handling"
> >> >    <para>
> >> >     When using binary mode to pass query parameters to the server
> >> >     and query results back to the client, no character set conversion
> >> >     is performed, so the situation is different.  In this case, an
> >> >     encoding declaration in the XML data will be observed, and if it
> >> >     is absent, the data will be assumed to be in UTF-8 (as required by
> >> >     the XML standard; note that PostgreSQL does not support UTF-16).
> >> >     On output, data will have an encoding declaration
> >> >     specifying the client encoding, unless the client encoding is
> >> >     UTF-8, in which case it will be omitted.
> >> >    </para>
> >>
> >> > In the first sentence shouldn't "no character set conversion" be "no
> >> > encoding conversion"? PostgreSQL is doing client/server encoding
> >> > conversion, rather than character set conversion.
> >>
> >> I think the text is treating "character set conversion" as meaning
> >> the same thing as "encoding conversion"; certainly I've never seen
> >> any place in our docs that draws a distinction between those terms.
> >> If you think there is a difference, maybe we need to define those
> >> terms somewhere.
> >
> > Uh, I think Unicode is a character set, and UTF8 is an encoding.  I
> > think Tatsuo is right here.
>
> Yes, a character set is different from an encoding. I though it's a
> common understanding among people.

Fixed with the attached applied patch.

--
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+                     Ancient Roman grave inscription +