I am just curious on the best practice for User Defined Table name vs a User Defined Field name that has the UDT linked to it. I have made both of them the same name in the past but i was talking to someone the other day that stated they usually make the names different. What is the best practice for this? I know what i have done in the past works, but I sure don't want to cause any confusion by making them the same.
Opinions are welcome...thanks.
Sue
The main distinction for UDT's is whether they are system or in a module (company specific). Use tables names that make sense to you.
For UDF's (and key column in the linked UDT) I tend to use the…
Correct. System UDT data is set once for all company codes (like zip codes / tax schedules / roles... are set once), where module UDT's have company specific data. Module UDT's do change the system…
The main distinction for UDT's is whether they are system or in a module (company specific). Use tables names that make sense to you.
For UDF's (and key column in the linked UDT) I tend to use the same UDF name for the linking field when I can.
Generally speaking, I try to avoid UDF names that are the same as Sage field names (unless they are mirror fields).
Avoid using the same UDF name in header and detail tables. This causes problems.
The main distinction for UDT's is whether they are system or in a module (company specific). Use tables names that make sense to you.
For UDF's (and key column in the linked UDT) I tend to use the same UDF name for the linking field when I can.
Generally speaking, I try to avoid UDF names that are the same as Sage field names (unless they are mirror fields).
Avoid using the same UDF name in header and detail tables. This causes problems.
