Subject | Re: [firebird-support] Possible values for RDB$FIELD_TYPE from RDB$FIELDS table |
---|---|
Author | Daniel Albuschat |
Post date | 2005-07-28T10:50:55Z |
2005/7/28, Helen Borrie <helebor@...>:
I'm working on a database documentation tool.
It'll extract database meta-information (domains, tables, fields,
procedures, etc.)
and let's you add a comment and additional meta-info (e.g. relations) to each
entity and then creates a XML document or a set of linked HTML documents.
So the name from RDB$TYPE_NAMES should be enough, IMHO.
If every possible name has a correlating entry, that is.
And btw., do you happen to know any tool that does a similar thing to what I've
just described?
Bye,
Daniel
--
eat(this); // delicious suicide
> >RDB$TYPES table should have all the translations.Thanks for the info, Helen.
>
> Hmm, well, it's true that it has *something* but it doesn't necessarily
> display information that's useful to designers:
I'm working on a database documentation tool.
It'll extract database meta-information (domains, tables, fields,
procedures, etc.)
and let's you add a comment and additional meta-info (e.g. relations) to each
entity and then creates a XML document or a set of linked HTML documents.
So the name from RDB$TYPE_NAMES should be enough, IMHO.
If every possible name has a correlating entry, that is.
And btw., do you happen to know any tool that does a similar thing to what I've
just described?
Bye,
Daniel
--
eat(this); // delicious suicide