>I'm curious as to where the crowd here stands on field naming conventions, particularly with future movement to SQL Server or Oracle in mind.
>I'm leaning toward functional naming - e.g., logical field in VFP starts with "l". SS or Oracle does not have logical, so it would have to become bit or number(1,0), respectively. Even if it was made numeric in VFP, it is still functions as a "logical" field, so the "l" convention still applies.
>Any thoughts?
>TIA

Trey:

FWIW, I'll be curious to see the opinions expressed on your post. Personally, I working on naming conventions for Fox and SQL views!