David Bustos wrote: >> For background, I'm using the identifier as the name since the >> identifier value contains the only necessary information that needs to >> accompany this property, i.e. it needs no property value. I would >> prefer not to create an unnecessary abstraction of a name just to be >> able to populate the property value with the identifier. To explain >> further, the "properties" in this case is a list of one or more group >> member entries that only differ in their identifiers. So creating the >> abstraction would also entail crafting a solution to create another >> namespace for these group member entries that would need to be based >> on some character string with an embedded sequence number. From the >> administrator's point of view, I think this will be confusing based on >> industry perception of these identifiers. >> >> Before I craft a solution that entails creating a name for each entry, >> is there anything that I might be missing in my above valid property >> name assumptions? And, with the background explanation I've given, >> might there be a different approach to accommodating a group and >> member list model as described above? >> > > Sorry, but I didn't follow you. Are you saying that you need to store > a list of strings? > > David >
A list of identifiers, each being a variable length of characters with no restrictions on the char value. It sounds like I cannot use the identifier as the property name so I will likely need to use an abstraction. I didn't see any support for lists either. Did I miss an interface? - John
