Ken,

>yeah - see - I really don't like the data type thing for fields - totally unecessary IMO for strong typed memory such as fields. I do use it, of course, for week typed cases like VFP variables.

I've used Hungarian Notation for variables since before I started using Xbase. It's a development timesaver for me, especially in strongly typed languages like C/C++ where casts are needed to convert datatypes. Indirectly it's a throwback to my days in engineering school where "unit analysis" makes sure you don't multiply lbs/ft³ times m/sec.

Every decent organization should have a table/field naming convention. There are probably several standards that are going to come up in the thread, They all have pluses and minuses, none are perfect in everyone's mind.

>I appreciate yor opinion. I am still debating on the "Table prefix" thing. The strongest arguments I still have for keeping it are:
>
>1 - always know what table a field belongs to - no chance for confusion
>2 - saves typing on joins since table refs/aliases are not needed
>3 - no chance of stomping on reserved words
>
>My only REAL concern is going against the "industry standard" grain, but interestingly, nobody has voiced an argument along that line.