@D9705996 - OK, so if a schema refers to the blueprint of a table-containing database, then doesn't that schema have a name? Like a database named client_info would have tables named users and addresses, and its schema would be the blueprint of the client_info table (its tables structure), wouldn't it still be less confusing to call it a schema instead of a database which can also refer to the host/server?
If I'm going off MySQL Workbench's description, a schema refers to a table-containing database regardless of its blueprint or structure.
Also, I was going through a Laravel issue I'm having, and found another reference to table-containing databases being called schemas:
https://medium.com/@ashokgelal/a-full-featured-multi-tenant-app-with-laravel-part-1-4049a3cc229d
*"If you don’t have it already, download and install SequelPro. Connect as root to your local MySQL server and create a new database name townhousedb.
Create a new user, townhouseadmin, and set the password as secret. Go to Global Privileges tab and click Check All button. Go to Schema Privileges tab and select townhousedb from schema list. Select all Available Privileges by hitting CMD+A keyboard shortcut and click < button to grant all the selected privileges. Finally, click Apply."*
At least in the MySQL world, it seems easier to call table-containing databases schemas... or at least understand what is being referred to when stating "schema" in relation to something containing tables and that doesn't make sense with it referring specifically to the host/server.
I'm really just trying to find a clear way to refer to what I'm talking about here without it causing confusion as it seems to be thought of a little differently here than elsewhere in my experience.