Re: Property sheet, ad hoc, property page, flexible data
From: Jonathan Leffler <jleffler_at_earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 07:19:39 GMT
Message-ID: <fiHEe.7496$dU3.1102_at_newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>
>>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.
>>>
>>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.
>>
>>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
>>Cheers! --dawn
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 07:19:39 GMT
Message-ID: <fiHEe.7496$dU3.1102_at_newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>
AC wrote:
> "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.
Another search in groups.google.com that works reasonably well is:
attribute value universal group:comp.databases.theory
I have a feeling that I'm missing the most appropriate combination of words (but 'attribute value' alone is a bad search in this news group).
-- Jonathan Leffler #include <disclaimer.h> Email: jleffler_at_earthlink.net, jleffler_at_us.ibm.com Guardian of DBD::Informix v2005.01 -- http://dbi.perl.org/Received on Sun Jul 24 2005 - 09:19:39 CEST