Brian Nalewajek - 2006-11-16

  A recurring point of frustration is in having to manually change role names, to avoid mapping errors when generating DDL scripts.  A common problem concerns ring constraints with a FactType like 'Team(ID) plays Team on Date()' with an asymetric ring constraint to keep a team from playing itself.  A solution is to rename the first role to 'teamA' and the 'second role to 'teamB'.  This removes the problem of object identifiers being reused in a single scope, and I think it also makes the resulting table/column names easier to figure out.
  Would a scheme to append an incremented character (A,B,C...), or Number (1,2,3...), to Entity type Object names (to be used as role names), that participate in ring constrained FactTypes be a good idea?  Is there a better convention to use?  Is there a downside to this?  Also, could it be made user selectable in the IDE (ORM designer Options under Tools Menu), in order to comply with a choosen naming standard or preference?
  Already, when you change a role name from the default, it shows up nicely on the diagram.  That alone is useful - if for no other reason than to indicate that a particular snag has been delt with.
  I think it's important to kick these ideas around to get various perspectives, before commiting to a new set of features/functionallity.  BRN..