>It seems to me that, especially working in a team, that you might be just a little short sighted.
>
>Most of the coding I do now is in Oracle, within a group of 5 people. The verbosity is a little tedious. But when I don't know how i would be able to search thru procedures the way i do if it wasn't for the verbosity.
>
>I can feel comfortable trying to find procedures thru the procedure browser because the names are so verbose. We do so many things, procedures have to have 2 parts to the name. First the group of data they deal with, second the purpose. So we are constantly bumping up against the 30 character limit for var names and proc names. But its worth it.
>
>Perry
>
>
>>The real only standard is that you make they names of procedures, functions, variables as english as possible and put underscores in place of spaces. Some of these can become verbose and tedious to to work with. You could call that a standard but in reality it isn't (if you ask me).
>>
>>But, the whole reason for this is how can I introduce to them that the standard they currently use is poor without telling them it's poor? It's ironic that they hate the standard they currently have but they're not willing to change for a better because even the better one has flaws. Unless it's a perfect solution they don't want it. I know Camel Notation and Naming conventions listed in the VFP are not perfect but it's used more widely and it's considered more of a standard.

---

I like the data and procedure bound together myself. I worked on a system years back where the prefix was the table it came from and then some suggestion of the content. All F-Keys were Prefix_Suffix. It made the SQL very understandable from the as A as B point of view.

__Stephen