Re: Naming Convention for Columns

[Quoted] In article <ygewwe0eoqm.fsf_at_cariboulake.com>, Michael Leo <mleo_at_cariboulake.com> wrote:
>
>Jeremy Rickard <Jeremy_at_SPAM.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
>> In article <3505ad61.266543_at_read.news.global.net.uk>, Keith Boulton
>> <boulkenospam_at_globalnet.co.uk> writes
>>
>> >Having said that, I did work for an organisation once which had DB2
>> >naming conventions where table and column names were limited to 8
>> >characters. The first three characters were a system mnemonic,
>> >followed by a five digit number i.e. select xyz00024, xyz00057 from
>> >xyz11003.
>>
>> That's nothing! I worked for an international (US based) company which
>> had one system with 4 character column names. These were abbreviations
>> of the full attribute names - in Norwegian, naturally.
>
>Hah!
>
>I once worked for a company that re-used bits that fell out of the
>ends of disconnected cables. If you got your weekly status
>reports in late you were chosen to sort them into piles of '1's
>and '0's.

[Quoted] I'd fire anyone who pulled that kind of s**t working for me. I've got enough problems using alpha characters without having to worry about what table/column 01010100 00110011 00101110 01000011 00110100 00110111 refers to.

-- 

--Neil Warnock   
--Apertus Systems Limited             Tel      : (44) 113 256 6000
--Leeds                               Email    : nfw_at_apertus.uk.com