"Byron Foster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Byron Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >> Daniel Rall wrote: > >> > >> >FWIW, I added code in Turbine 3 for this sort thing. > >> > > >> > > >> > >> Hello, Here is a new patch that implements the java naming scheme > >> through attributes in the database schema that works with the new code > >> that you added. the <database> element now has a new attribute > >> "defaultNameConversion" that may be either "underscore", "javaname", > >> or "nochange". The description of these are in the DTD. Also the > >> <table> and <column> elements have an optional attribute > >> "nameConversion" that may also be one of the above. Without any > >> method specification the behavior of the name conversion is as it was > >> before. > > > > Commited, thanks Byron. Would you explain the addition of the > > nameConversion attribute to the id-method-parameter element? Also, > > since this change is Java-specific (I think), IMO an attribute name > > which includes the text "java" for the database element's default Java > > naming scheme would be more descriptive than defaultConversionMethod > > (which is rather generic). How about defaultJavaNamingMethod (or > >something like that)? > > Hello, Thanks for the commit. Hmm, there shouldn't be a nameConversion > attribute for the id-method-parameter, only for the column and table > elements, and the latest cvs version of the dtd is consistent with this. I > think looking at the patch may be misleading?
You're right -- I misread the diff. > for the attribute name that sounds fine, I will submit a patch. So the > following names would be changed to: > > defaultConversionMethod -> defaultJavaNamingMethod > nameConversion -> javaNamingMethod (for column and table elements) Yes, I think those names (or ones like them) are more indicative of what the attributes are for. > BTW, I was not sure if the dtd was the correct place to put the docs for > the different naming methods. Are there plans to add this type of > documentation to the dtd? the xdocs? both? regardless I can add some > additional documentation. IMHO, putting documentation in the DTD is just fine. Examples and usage instructions should be placed in the xdocs directory, --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
