Hi,
I'm not sure, if I'm right here.
Lately (while working on a module) I found, that the tabels of #__content
and #__categories (and other components, had a short look) have similar
columns, yet named differently.
E.g.
#__content.state ~ #__categories.published
#__content.created ~ #__categories.created_time
#__content.created_by ~ #__categories.created_user_id
Is there a reason, why the columns are named differently? To me it seems,
that the names should be the same.
Kind regards
Mareike

On 29.08.2012, at 17:57, hoochicken <mareike.rie...@ql.de> wrote:

Best regards
Rouven

smime.p7s 6K Download

Those tables are pretty much the same tables as we had in 2005.

There are tons of modules, plugins and components that make queries against
those tables so much as we might wish to make the field names the same  the
breakage potential is huge. There will certainly be a point when that all
changes when we switch the content model, but there is no point in making
the changes until there is substantial benefit.

Elin

Thanks for the explanations!
When planning a new component, do you recommand a certain standard?
Would it be better to use 'state' or 'published' in a new component?
(Now it may be of no real use.
But later on it might be useful to have components with a fix group of some
kind of standardized/recommended column names (and the additional columns
typical for a special component).)
Kind regards
Mareike

If you use state you can extend JTableContent more easily. That's
especially useful if you are going to track assets.   The main fields with
varying names are
state/published
title/name
link/url
params/attribs
and then a bunch of the publication information. The only thing I would say
about that is categories is different than all the others but it matches
what is in the ucm repository.

Elin