On 8 March 2011 02:54, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> writes:
>> On 7 March 2011 23:30, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> Maybe we could say "the name or OID of a table", or some such phrase,
>>> so as to subtly avoid the expectation that what is being referred to
>>> is the datatype named "name"?
>
>> Yes, that would remove the ambiguity. :)
>
> That wording turned out not to work well in context, at least not
> without major surgery on the containing sentences. I decided that
> the best way was to just say "specified table" in the function tables,
> and then borrow the paragraph that explains about regclass
> arguments from the sequence-functions page.
Thanks Tom.
--
Thom Brown
Twitter: @darkixion
IRC (freenode): dark_ixion
Registered Linux user: #516935