17 Jul
2009
17 Jul
'09
9:59 a.m.
Liam Proven wrote:
2009/7/16 Sridhar Ayengar <ploopster at
gmail.com>:
Yes, as Sridhar pointed out... it would be interesting to know how many of the
current crop of folk who call it sequel are doing so in reference to the
original IBM version. I suspect the answer is rather close to zero ;-)
"Correct" pronunciation might be a matter for debate, given that IBM renamed
their product; were the lots of people *after* the renaming still going around
calling it sequel? Certainly it was SQL by the time I first encountered
databases, and I only started hearing 'sequel' in the latter half of the 90s
(around the rise of the MS product, I suspect, BICBW)
Either way it's interesting how these pronunciations go in phases - perhaps
everyone will be calling it sequel in ten years' time, and anyone spelling it
out as S.Q.L will be beaten over the head with a large stick.
cheers
Jules
When IBM first developed the language, it was
called SEQUEL. It was renamed
to SQL later, because of a trademark issue. The pronunciation "sequel" is
older than the abbreviation "SQL".
/Thank/ you, Sridhar.
Jules, David: I'm afraid it really doesn't matter if you like it or
not. The pronunciation "sequel" is correct, because SEQUEL, IBM's
Structured English QUEry Language, was called that, and the one that
now bears the initialism S. Q. L. was derived from this.