Schema

[David Merrill]

On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 07:29:30PM -0600, Rob Browning wrote:
> David Merrill <dmerrill@lupercalia.net> writes:
> 
> > Ugh! That is a completely meaningless name. *Every* numeric field is
> > a "quantity". Of WHAT is it a quantity?
> 
> Well, we had talked about using "quantity" and "value".  Quantity
> would indicate how much of the thing you have, and value it's value.
> Though quantity, taken by itself, is ambiguous, I'm not sure it's so
> bad when within the context of a split.  It would be hard to confuse
> it with any of the other fields, and it's arguably better than
> damount.
> 
> In any case, better names, would certainly be welcome.

Value I think is okay, as long as it is the value of the entity which
the row represents. Otherwise I like something a little more specific,
even if it is redundant, like split_value. I'll give it some more
thought.

-- 
Dr. David C. Merrill                     http://www.lupercalia.net
Linux Documentation Project                dmerrill@lupercalia.net
Collection Editor & Coordinator            http://www.linuxdoc.org
                                       Finger me for my public key

Ingrate, n.:
	A man who bites the hand that feeds him, and then complains of
	indigestion.