On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 11:07 PM, Jeffrey Kain via 4D_Tech < 4d_tech@lists.4d.com> wrote:
> Yeah, so many caveats to object fields. Bite the bullet, use a related > table... > > Well, I wrote that i am playing with it, Testing how it can be used, what commands are available and where are limitation, and keeping eye on new development. I am looking at object fields not as a JSON structures, but as a name value pairs. I want to test the idea of keeping denormalized fields in object (but not necessarily only denormalized fields), and building some simple way to maintain, show and search them. Now sure how it will work, maybe not well, but without testing I will not know. I see few advantages: while I keep some rules how to name fields in structure, I can (or plan to) give object fields more user friendly names. I will have more flexibility to add / remove / rename fields. I will have to adjust search and sort dialogues, and I plan to do a simple ones using just one object field. -- Peter Bozek ********************************************************************** 4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG) FAQ: http://lists.4d.com/faqnug.html Archive: http://lists.4d.com/archives.html Options: http://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech Unsub: mailto:4d_tech-unsubscr...@lists.4d.com **********************************************************************
