Column and relational names in 2/2008 CTP

  • Hi,

    Thanks for the latest drop!  I haven't even had a chance to DL it yet, but did read through the release notes in the News forum.

    It was good to see that the team is aware of the importance of column and relational name abbreviations; and that this will be most helpful if full descriptive names can be retained in the model - where expedient compromises are not required.  I hope they continue to evolve this two track approach to  model object names.

    How about using color to indicate which name form is being used?  Perhaps, an optimal UI would provide the alternate name as a "hint" with mouseover.  having this an easily toggled tool option would make it even better.


    • Jos Bol
      Jos Bol

      I second that! Long and complete descriptions in the conceptual model are very handy, both in having a better idea of what is going on if you look back at older models and models of other people. Also for generating the reports I personally prefer to have normal, non abreviated descriptions. To be able to do this while keeping the names in the database itself short and not to verbose is absolutely a very useful feature and actually one of the things I found to be anoying of the VEA ORM tool. It is possible to abreviate the mappings and such, but not in a really comfortable way to say the least.

      As for indicating on the diagram which form is used, I suggest indicating which relations and other elements would result a in large name more or less in the same manner that errors are indicated now: show the warning in the context menu and take the user to the respective fields to define the form or custom name to be used for mapping.