pg.ddx.io pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feedRe: [pgaccess-developers] the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas
8+ messages / 4 participants
[nested] [flat]
* the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas
@ 2002-09-04 17:00 Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
2002-09-04 17:07 ` Re: [pgaccess-developers] the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas Brett Schwarz <brett_schwarz@yahoo.com>
2002-09-04 18:36 ` Re: the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas terry <tg5027@citlink.net>
0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Iavor Raytchev @ 2002-09-04 17:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ross J. Reedstrom <reedstrm@rice.edu>; +Cc: pgsql-interfaces; pgaccess - developers <developers@pgaccess.org>
Ross and Iavor:
> > > BTW, has the 'schema' tab been renamed yet? With actual
> > > schema
> > > in 7.3, that'll get confusing.
>
> > Not renamed yet.
>
> In which case, we need to come up with a different name. How
> does
> "diagrams" strike you all?
Hm... In MS Access it is called 'Relations' which sounds kind of
correct. Basically now we just display them, so 'Diagrams' could be
correct for us for now. In MS Access the relations are actually built
there. That's what I would like us to do - use the current 'Schema' tab
(they are not tabs anymore in the new interface) and make it able to
build relations (represented in the code with referential integrity).
Then 'Diagrams' would not fit, but 'Relations'. Also 'References'.
Iavor
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgaccess-developers] the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas
2002-09-04 17:00 the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
@ 2002-09-04 17:07 ` Brett Schwarz <brett_schwarz@yahoo.com>
2002-09-04 13:54 ` Re: [pgaccess-developers] the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas John L. Turner <jlt@wvinter.net>
2002-09-04 17:14 ` Re: [pgaccess-developers] the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
1 sibling, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Brett Schwarz @ 2002-09-04 17:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>; +Cc: pgsql-interfaces; pgaccess - developers <developers@pgaccess.org>
But in relational theory, doesn't relations refer to what we commonly
refer to as tables? I think this would be confusing as well. However, I
do agree that it would be cool to have it automatically generated...
On Wed, 2002-09-04 at 10:00, Iavor Raytchev wrote:
> Ross and Iavor:
>
> > > > BTW, has the 'schema' tab been renamed yet? With actual
> > > > schema
> > > > in 7.3, that'll get confusing.
> >
> > > Not renamed yet.
> >
> > In which case, we need to come up with a different name. How
> > does
> > "diagrams" strike you all?
>
> Hm... In MS Access it is called 'Relations' which sounds kind of
> correct. Basically now we just display them, so 'Diagrams' could be
> correct for us for now. In MS Access the relations are actually built
> there. That's what I would like us to do - use the current 'Schema' tab
> (they are not tabs anymore in the new interface) and make it able to
> build relations (represented in the code with referential integrity).
> Then 'Diagrams' would not fit, but 'Relations'. Also 'References'.
>
> Iavor
--
Brett Schwarz
brett_schwarz AT yahoo.com
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgaccess-developers] the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas
2002-09-04 17:00 the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
2002-09-04 17:07 ` Re: [pgaccess-developers] the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas Brett Schwarz <brett_schwarz@yahoo.com>
@ 2002-09-04 13:54 ` John L. Turner <jlt@wvinter.net>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: John L. Turner @ 2002-09-04 13:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Brett Schwarz <brett_schwarz@yahoo.com>; Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>; +Cc: pgsql-interfaces; pgaccess - developers <developers@pgaccess.org>
On Wednesday 04 September 2002 17:07, Brett Schwarz wrote:
> But in relational theory, doesn't relations refer to what we commonly
> refer to as tables? I think this would be confusing as well. However, I
> do agree that it would be cool to have it automatically generated...
In MS Access they can be a combination of Queries and Tables.
Not knowing any better, if it a relationship of any kind, then call it a
relation. At least us unwashed from the MS Access world would get
a better handle on it. ( if that is what they really are )
John
>
> On Wed, 2002-09-04 at 10:00, Iavor Raytchev wrote:
> > Ross and Iavor:
> > > > > BTW, has the 'schema' tab been renamed yet? With actual
> > > > > schema
> > > > > in 7.3, that'll get confusing.
> > > >
> > > > Not renamed yet.
> > >
> > > In which case, we need to come up with a different name. How
> > > does
> > > "diagrams" strike you all?
> >
> > Hm... In MS Access it is called 'Relations' which sounds kind of
> > correct. Basically now we just display them, so 'Diagrams' could be
> > correct for us for now. In MS Access the relations are actually built
> > there. That's what I would like us to do - use the current 'Schema' tab
> > (they are not tabs anymore in the new interface) and make it able to
> > build relations (represented in the code with referential integrity).
> > Then 'Diagrams' would not fit, but 'Relations'. Also 'References'.
> >
> > Iavor
--
John Turner
JCI Inc.
http://home.ntelos.net/~JLT
"Just because you do not know the answer
does not mean that someone else does"
Stephen J. Gould, {rip}
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [pgaccess-developers] the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas
2002-09-04 17:00 the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
2002-09-04 17:07 ` Re: [pgaccess-developers] the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas Brett Schwarz <brett_schwarz@yahoo.com>
@ 2002-09-04 17:14 ` Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Iavor Raytchev @ 2002-09-04 17:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-interfaces; pgaccess - developers <developers@pgaccess.org>
Brett:
> But in relational theory, doesn't relations refer to what we commonly
> refer to as tables? I think this would be confusing as well.
> However, I
> do agree that it would be cool to have it automatically generated...
I am not an expert in relational theory... If it is so - then that's bad
name. But if the native speakers and relational theory experts (joke :)
agree that what we have now as 'Schema' can be called 'Diagrams' and
used for creating different documentations, etc., and what is left is
the referential integrity (looking at it and visual management) than we
can call the new thing just 'Visual referential integrity manager' :)))
if not too long...
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas
2002-09-04 17:00 the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
@ 2002-09-04 18:36 ` terry <tg5027@citlink.net>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: terry @ 2002-09-04 18:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>; pgsql-interfaces
>> Hm... In MS Access it is called 'Relations' which sounds kind of
>> correct.
Actually, the window is called "Relationships", not "Relations"....
--
terry
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas
@ 2002-09-04 18:22 Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
2002-09-04 19:25 ` Re: the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas terry <tg5027@citlink.net>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Iavor Raytchev @ 2002-09-04 18:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-interfaces; pgaccess - developers <developers@pgaccess.org>
> >> Hm... In MS Access it is called 'Relations' which sounds kind of
> >> correct.
>
> Actually, the window is called "Relationships", not "Relations"....
Correct. Was lazy to look it up. Does this change something?
Iavor
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas
2002-09-04 18:22 Re: the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
@ 2002-09-04 19:25 ` terry <tg5027@citlink.net>
2002-09-04 19:43 ` Re: the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: terry @ 2002-09-04 19:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-interfaces
>> > >> Hm... In MS Access it is called 'Relations' which sounds kind
>> > >> of correct.
>> >
>> > Actually, the window is called "Relationships", not
>> > "Relations"....
>>
>> Correct. Was lazy to look it up. Does this change something?
Not really, I was just following up on the discussion about the
incorrect use of the term Relations by MS Access. I don't think that
Relationships is a bad tab label - except that it's a bit long for the
current size tabs :).
Access's Relationships are all placed on one canvas, regardless of
whether or not there are several independent diagrams present. If this
model is to be used by pgaccess, it would make just as much sense to
put 'Relationships' into the Database menu instead of a tab, since the
New, Open, and Design actions would not mean anything.
the-$0.02-of-an-old-Access-developer-wishing-the-best-to-pgaccess ...
terry
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas
2002-09-04 18:22 Re: the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
2002-09-04 19:25 ` Re: the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas terry <tg5027@citlink.net>
@ 2002-09-04 19:43 ` Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Iavor Raytchev @ 2002-09-04 19:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-interfaces; pgaccess - developers <developers@pgaccess.org>
Iavor and terry:
> >> Correct. Was lazy to look it up. Does this change something?
>
> Not really, I was just following up on the discussion about the
> incorrect use of the term Relations by MS Access. I don't think that
> Relationships is a bad tab label - except that it's a bit
> long for the
> current size tabs :).
>
> Access's Relationships are all placed on one canvas, regardless of
> whether or not there are several independent diagrams
> present. If this
> model is to be used by pgaccess, it would make just as much sense to
> put 'Relationships' into the Database menu instead of a tab,
> since the
> New, Open, and Design actions would not mean anything.
>
> the-$0.02-of-an-old-Access-developer-wishing-the-best-to-pgaccess ...
There are no tabs anymore. The new interface is... you should download
and see it.
Also - there was the idea to rename 'Schema' to 'Diagrams' as there can
be many such - snapshots of different parts of the database. Useful when
one has to write a documentation (I did this once).
And then - a 'visual referential integrity manager' (a future feature)
that will allow referential integrity to be viewed/created/edited in a
visual manner.
So - for the native speakers - there is an option the 'Visual
referential integrity manager' to be called 'Relationships'.
Any native comments?
Iavor
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-09-04 19:43 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-09-04 17:00 the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
2002-09-04 17:07 ` Brett Schwarz <brett_schwarz@yahoo.com>
2002-09-04 13:54 ` John L. Turner <jlt@wvinter.net>
2002-09-04 17:14 ` Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
2002-09-04 18:36 ` terry <tg5027@citlink.net>
2002-09-04 18:22 Re: the current 'schema' tab - renaming ideas Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
2002-09-04 19:25 ` terry <tg5027@citlink.net>
2002-09-04 19:43 ` Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox