|Subject||Re: [IB-Architect] Identifier naming woes|
> I think it makes sense to go back to the requirements. Why doesBecause the reality is that most systems grow organically over time or
> somebody need to change a name? Certainly requirements change
> that dictate extension of string size or datatype upgrade or
> addition of new fields. But why should a database system go
> out of its way to support a name change?
are incrementally built from the beginning or a prototyping development
style is followed.
All these mean that the design of a database is much more dynamic that
it used to be.
At least that's the way it seems to me.