I disagree we should change this back. I don't know if anyone
remembers, but this is how I implemented long ago in the first
versions of the post-XML CouchDB. The problem was there where other
reserved fields in documents that started with underscore, but in
other places the fields wouldn't have an underscore. Keep track of
which fieldname had underscores and where became confusing. The rule
was changed to be simpler to understand and deal with. If it's in the
root of a doc and it starts with underscore, it's reserved. You don't
see the reserved underscore fields anywhere else, only in document top
level.
-Damien
On Dec 28, 2008, at 2:21 PM, Jan Lehnardt wrote:
On 28 Dec 2008, at 14:32, Antony Blakey wrote:
On 28/12/2008, at 11:56 PM, Paul Davis wrote:
Why "id" and "rev" are used instead of "_id" and
"_rev" I couldn't really tell you. I hate to say "historical
reasons"
but I'm guessing that when Damien designed the view output he just
labeled then "id" and "rev" without the underscore because it's not
needed to distinguish from the rest of the doc.
Desirable to change that (and any other inconsistencies) before a 1.0
This keeps coming up and I've been advocating this for a while now:
+1 for changing view result rows `rev` to `_rev` to avoid confusion.
CC'ing [email protected].
Cheers
Jan
--
