V4RB: Naming Convention for ObjectPtr-Link

[Claudius Sailer]

Hi Ruslan,
 
Am Dienstag 06 April 2010 um 09:47PM schrieb "Ruslan Zasukhin" <ruslan_zasukhin at valentina-db.com>:
>On 4/7/10 7:29 AM, "Claudius Sailer" <claudius.sailer at me.com> wrote:
>
>>>> for linking tbl_person and tbl_phones:
>>>> 
>>>> lnk_person_has_phone or lnk_phone_of_person
>>>> 
>>>> Actually we did not use the lnk_ part, but in retrospect it would have been
>>>> better (easier to filter out what you need when working in the sql-editor)
>>> 
>>> Yes, this is the most common method to give names for links.
>>> Can be even automated :)
>> 
>> 
>> I do it now this way.
>> 
>> tablename_fieldname__referencetablename
>
>Well, let me even more clarify.
>
>Bart above have give name with some human sense.
>
>Really automatd names are:
>
>    link_T1_T2
>
>I.e. We just show names of tables...
>
>In theory between the same tables T1 and T2 can be few different  links.
>Then name can be 
>
>    link_T1_T2_N
>
>Or add some sense word
>
>
>In your above example, for me not clear why to add field name...
>Link is something between tables... Link should not be related to fields.

I don't understand this. The link is not between tables. It is ObjectPtr between one filed in one table to an other table. In a table I can have a lot of fields as ObjectPtr with connections to a lot of other tables. With the name I am using I can see which filed is linked via ObjectPtr in which table to what other table.
When I use only table1 and table2 I only know that this tables are linked but I have to look into the table definition to see the complete information.

Bye the way Barts hint was great and I see the "human sense" but I missed some information to I expand the hint of Bart ;-))

bye


Claudius