The biggest reason for breaking the existing convention is that it makes the thing a nightmare to maintain right now and has a lot of overhead. It's not an unacceptable level of overhead, but I feel changing its structure will improve it significantly. Though the point Maureen makes is a good one.
I don't have access to SQL 12 yet (budgets in educational institutions being what they are), but I probably will after the first of the year so maybe I'll just put this project off till then and look at that feature to see if it meets my needs. > Hi Kris, > > One thing to consider is the flexibility that SQL 12 has regarding XML > data > structures. You can store all kinds of things in it dynamically and > retrieve > that data, search on it, etc. > > Of course, it warps the minds of those of us brought up in the EF Codd > approach > to relational database theory, more than a little bit. But it does > work well. > > That said, is there a reason a newer design wouldn't be able to follow > the prior > developer's precedent? > > --Ben ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:357045 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm
