Re: id field

On Monday 10 November 2003 18:12, Bruno Vernier wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 06:00:47PM +0100, David Calinski wrote:
> > and I am not happy when things get complicated without a good reason.
> > So I ask whatever "id" field can be really useful, does anyone really use
> > it, or will use? (if so - then does agree to have "id" as a number, not
> > string?)
>
> as far as I know, traditionally, ID fields are simple serial numbers. 
> Perhaps the better question is to ask if the category or keywords
> information should be stored in their own element(s) called something other
> than ID

Actually, what's wrong with the current implementation? Just provide a string 
for people to do extra stuff with if they want, and completely ignore it in 
the core, apart from loading and saving it. No extra code necessary. 

If having an 'id' element is a problem with reserved keywords in XML, then 
just rename it to 'descr' or whatever when exporting the XML.

Peter

------------------------------------------------
Peter Bienstman
Ghent University, Dep. of Information Technology
Sint-Pietersnieuwstraat 41, B-9000 Gent, Belgium
tel: +32 9 264 34 45, fax: +32 9 264 35 93
WWW: http://photonics.intec.ugent.be
email: [email protected]
------------------------------------------------



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/