[phpBT-dev] (no subject)

[Jirka P. <fi...@us...>]

> I've been thinking the same about adding the user selection of
> templates - adding a column for each item is 'quick' to develop but not
> as flexible as the 'row' method that I think you are talking of.

Yes, that's what I'm talking about. I don't like 'Microsoft like' 'easy to =
develop but hard to work with' solutions.

> The point about not having to take the db off line is a good one -
> adding a row to an existing table is really easy because you are simply
> manipulating data in the table whilst adding a column to an existing
> table is slightly more 'risky' as you're altering the structure.
> I can't see there's much difference for a new installation, but where an
> existing install is being upgraded the row 'method' has to be better...

Of course. And next thing, I haven't talked about yet is scalability. When =
we will use 'row' method we can scale it much easier (think about e.g. inde=
xes) and faster.

>  From the work I've been doing on the user-based template selection, the
> 'row' method requires significantly more coding & logic than the
> 'column' method but once that's done I think it's a more elegant
> solution.

Mhmm, this is the worst part of it. I can't promise I will be 100% able to =
do all template coding, because it's (I don't know why) hard for me to unde=
rstand the logic. It seems to me, that there are same things on different p=
laces and sometimes one thing is duplicated in another script.

> Hey, no need to apologise... Your English is far far better than my
> Czech.... (or any other European language other than English)

Czech is much more complicated. Be happy you have not to learn it.
For example (this is not as 'off topic' as it looks) we say "Odstranit data=
b=E1ze" for "Delete databases" and "Seznam datab=E1z=ED" for "Database list=
". English differs to czech in flexibility of the words. English words are =
not inflectable, but ours are (as you can see from my example).

Czech localization is often the thing which really complicates the work, be=
cause we have 7 different cases for singular and another 7 for plural, whil=
e english has only two (one for singular and one for plural). And of course=
 we have not one, but instantly 7+ different binary codepages for only one =
language (I'm really glad that only two of them are frequently used, but I =
will be more glad when the mainstream will switch to unicode).

-

I want to read Ben's comments before I will start, John, but tell me if you=
 are able to help with tepmlates.

Jirka

P.S.: There is no need to list me in CC when sending reply to dev-list, I'm=
 already a subscriber.