>Jacob ---
>
>Not bad but I have seen underscores cause problems with ODBC drivers and some other functions a while back (maybe fixed now). Anyway, if you are explicitely referring to the fields by using table.field, then why? I do like to use PK and FK as prefixs to keys.
>
>
>>In my reading I came across a convention for namining fields in a table that used a 2 letter table identifier followd by an underbar as a prefix to all table field names.
>>For example in a Customer table une would finf fields:
>>cu_CustCode
>>cu_Address
>>cu_City
>>cu_State
>>
>>etc. Each table had its fields specified in this manner.
>>
>>It is clear that there are advantages to this nomenclature in that you can easily identify and distinguish a field in a table from memory variable. There are also advantages in SQL statements.
>>
>>Doing it however is somewhat of a pain and I am wondering if it is worth the effort.
>>
>>Does anyone have any experience in using this naming approach?

Just for amusement:

I'm working on a legesy upgrade that uses name, date, and the name of the table for the primary key... :)