Re: Database terminology
- From: "tina" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 04:23:23 GMT
the
word "lookup" has such a negative connotation for me...
"and thou shalt abhor the use of "Lookup Fields" which art the creation
of the Evil One."
-/http://www.mvps.org/access/tencommandments.htm/
I know... fields and tables are different, but still, it weighs so
heavily upon me...
LOL
i usually call them "supporting" tables, myself - i don't like the Lookup
association, either - because they support the "real" data tables. :)
"Smartin" <smartin108@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:au-dnWC3GNisEMfYnZ2dnUVZ_rqdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cyberwolf wrote:just
That does make more sense. Since I am a self taught DB admin, I have
experts.come up with my own terminology and then chage it as I hear from the
I rather prefer "static tables" myself, but perhaps this is because the
word "lookup" has such a negative connotation for me...
"and thou shalt abhor the use of "Lookup Fields" which art the creation
of the Evil One."
-/http://www.mvps.org/access/tencommandments.htm/
I know... fields and tables are different, but still, it weighs so
heavily upon me...
--
Smartin
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Database terminology
- From: Jamie Collins
- Re: Database terminology
- References:
- Re: Database terminology
- From: Jeff Boyce
- Re: Database terminology
- From: Smartin
- Re: Database terminology
- Prev by Date: Re: Database terminology
- Next by Date: Re: Attribute-value approach for table design
- Previous by thread: Re: Database terminology
- Next by thread: Re: Database terminology
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|