personal opinion: I'm not wild about either 'attributes' or 'properties', (a) they seem too long, and (b) yes, they are too similar to generic ORM terms
many many moons ago (pre Windows-1.0) I used an Ascii-GUI thing called C-scape (I think it's called "vermont views" now). anyway, most of its objects had a space for a pointer to arbitrary user data, and they consistently used something like "udata" for the name of the pointer. So I'm +1 on a short, non-generic and uniquely "user-y" kind of name like "udata". I know it sounds ugly, but we're dealing with database and ORM terminology. Just about every generic name you can think of is bound to be confused with something database-oriented. Rick --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sqlalchemy" group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
