On 03.01.23 09:41, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 03, 2023 at 01:03:01PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> One minor comment:
>> - spoken in Belgium (BE), with a <acronym>UTF-8</acronym> character set
>> + spoken in Belgium (BE), with a <acronym>UTF</acronym>-8 character set
>>
>> Shouldn't this be <acronym>UTF8</acronym> as we are using in func.sgml?
>
> Yeah, I was wondering as well why this change is not worse, which is
> why I left it out of 33ab0a2. There is an acronym for UTF in
> acronym.sgml, which makes sense to me, but that's the only place where
> this is used. To add more on top of that, the docs basically need
> only UTF8, and we have three references to UTF-16, none of them using
> the <acronym> markup.
The thing is called "UTF-8". Here, we are not talking about the
PostgreSQL identifier.
