On Mon, 9 Jul 2001 09:05:14 -0600 (MDT), John Halleck wrote:
>> I've always like a combination of numbers and characters for keys (ie. "A134BC"). The code is pretty simple to write but it
>> increases the keys for a given fixed size rather considerably! If the key was 3 digits long, there are then 46656 possible
> But (Ala IOS oid's) a syntaticly delimited field need not have a fixed size limit.
> ("FOO.123.B" style instead of "FOO123B" style) when one can identify field limits
> issues like sorting (brought up on the page) are moot and can be handled in the
> LDAP fashion.
You are correct. Must be my database work interferring again. <g>
>> combinations instead of 1000. I like to limit it to upper case to keep things a little simpler but lower case could be brought in
>> too.
> Upper and lower case makes lots of assumptions about the underlying character sets.
Ooops. A very good reason to leave characters out, if possible. But I remember something about IDs being constrained to
"Name" types ([character][number|character]*).
- Richard Knapp
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Sep 03 2001 - 06:00:00 CEST