[AccessD] Table naming conventions

Yes, I know, but I tried groups and hated them.  We do use folders and
subfolders in our .Net projects, and multiple projects in a solution.
But when you're looking through a long list of objects in the Forms
subfolder, all you have to go on is the icon and the suffix at the
Loooonnnngg end of the object name to tell you exactly what it is.
Unless it's a vb modules, of course. LOL

There are 4-1/2 of us doing dot.net development using VSS, so we all
have to play by the same rules.  The 1/2 is my boss, who doesn't get his
hands too dirty in forms, reports, data tier details, and vb code, but
who does jump in to stuff occasionally.

Charlotte Foust


-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Shamil
Salakhetdinov
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 2:34 PM
To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Table naming conventions


<<<
I can't have everything I want.
>>>
Charlotte,

In MS Access database window you can create groups and put links to
objects 
into these groups and rename these links whatever you need/prefer - the 
source object names will stay unchanged...

In VS.NET 2005 projects you can create folders and subforders having
source 
files as well as links to the source files - by thus you can create
groups 
of related source files. Unfortunately you can't give different names to
the 
links as in MS Access groups still it's a useful feature to keep related

source files grouped - especialy useful in large projects with many
source 
files....

Shamil

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Charlotte Foust" <cfoust at infostatsystems.com>
To: "Access Developers discussion and problem solving" 
<accessd at databaseadvisors.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 11:58 PM
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Table naming conventions


>I do use naming conventions in VB.Net, at least as much as I'm allowed

>to.  My boss decreed we would use suffixes instead of prefixes to name

>forms, reports, etc., so related objects would sort together in the  
>project.  Now you have to read the entire name of the object to find 
>out  what it is!  We've never used prefixes on table names, or fields, 
>so  that hasn't been an issue in converting to .Net.  I prefer prefixes

>on  table names and I prefer prefixes because they allow my eye to 
>skate  over the object types I don't want to examine without having to 
>read the  entire name of the object.  SIGH!  I can't have everything I 
>want.
>
> Charlotte
>
>
>