>>As a preference... in your field names... do you include the type as part of the description...? even if you are using Hungarian notation...? such as...
>>
>>tstarttime vs tstart
>>dduedate vs ddue
>
>NO.
>But why does yor example suggest that dDueDate could be DDate... why not DueDate. Similarly for StartTime.
>Do you notice that getting away from abbreviating absolutely everything also lets the fields define their type almost by default?

That is why I questioned it. If I elect to use Hungarian (which I have) then naming a field dduedate seems redundant. It's saying dduedate=dateduedate whereas my example ddue=duedate. It seems pointless to include the word "date" at the end of something that the notation says is a date.

BTW - I don't think my example suggested that dDueDate could be DDate.