Re: Property sheet, ad hoc, property page, flexible data

From: AC <AC_at_No.spam>
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 05:05:55 GMT
Message-ID: <TkFEe.4555$6M3.3607@trnddc03>

"dawn" <dawnwolthuis_at_gmail.com> wrote in message news:1122168791.730962.143770_at_g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> AC wrote:

>> "mAsterdam" <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org> wrote in message
>> news:42dd8886$0$76953$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl...
>> > AC wrote:
>> >> ...I want to create "base" tables with fields that are intrinsic to 
>> >> the
>> >> application. I also want to allow the customers using the application 
>> >> to
>> >> be able to create their own fields so that they can easily customize 
>> >> the
>> >> application.
>> <snip/>
>> >
>> > If this group would have a FAQ, this Q would be in it.
>> > For now you'll have to do with googling the archives.
>> >
>> > The short answer is: don't go that way, you'll get the worst
>> > of both worlds.
>>

<snip/>
> I get a couple of hits on the string

>

> user-defined-attributes

>

> in cdt in googlegroups and I suspect some variations would also yield
> results.

>
<snip/>
> try to meet the user requirements. You can assess the risk to your
> company if you were to toss in a few strings, ints, and floats with
> names like M1, M2, or userDef1, userDef2 or User_Def_1, User_Def_2 ...
> (just understand that some DBAs in the audience are certain I'm either
> stupid or ignorant when they read this). Place such attributes (with
> unique names) in relations that are likely spots for additions,
> document it well, and make UI's to collect the data.

>

> Another approach is one where you store tag & value in two separate
> attributes so they can name a value and enter it, thereby mixing
<snip/>
> Cheers! --dawn

Thanks for the reply and the search string suggestion, Dawn. We considered tag/value storage but decided that it wouldn't work as well as defining each field. The problem with pre-creation of the fields (UserDef1, UserDef2, etc) is that you would be stuck with for example 5 text fields, 6 ints, 2 date_time, etc. This would be limitation that does not appear to have much benefit.

Regards --AC Received on Sun Jul 24 2005 - 00:05:55 CDT