After a quick search on Google I found this: http://www.ss64.com/orasyntax/naming.html
Which seems like a good little guide. It mentions an ISO standard (ISO11157) but I had a quick look at this and this appears to be a more general standard for data type naming. Andrew. On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:11:15 +0100, Keith Gaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andrew Dixon wrote: > > > Hi Everyone. > > > > I'm just starting a major project for a government client and the > > first job is to design the database. Is there any recongnised > > convention on the naming of database fields. In the past I have always > > named them [table_name_field_name] for example: projects_id where the > > table is called 'projects' and the field is called 'id'. > > None that I know of, but what I do is use plural in general for the > table names, e.g. "categories", "posts". After all, we are talking about > sets here, and it's natural to pluralise them. > > Fields I give the singular form to, so the "projects" would have a field > called "project_id". The reasoning being that whereas the set contains > many projects, hence the pluralisation, each tuple refers to just one, > so it's singular. > > K. > > -- > Keith Gaughan, Developer > Digital Crew Ltd., Pembroke House, Pembroke Street, Cork, Ireland > http://www.digital-crew.com/ > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Sams Teach Yourself Regular Expressions in 10 Minutes by Ben Forta http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=40 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:181825 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
