Re: Schema/QB: table:field vs. table.field

"Piotras" <pp-VVDi8QVAvoBWk0Htik3J/[email protected]> wrote:

> > +1 for dropping a special metatype syntax.
> 
> An object 'attachment' property should be reserved word in schema, or QB should
> use "black magic" to define what you were thinking about?
> Object's attachment property or object's attachment (blob) ?

Guys, I mentioned about colon and dot on *this* list few months ago.
Are we going to come back to this thread when 1.8 is out?

Piotras