I’m going to be reporting all the little usability issues I find. These are often what new users will notice. These are not for me, these are for you and future users.
If I want to make a database and name it something that has an ‘s’ on the end, it changes it incorrectly. (This might be new though I wasn’t paying enough attention).
Example:
Database I wanted - Vitenas - this is a client’s last name.
“For the majority of words ending in S, you just add an -es to the end . “Walrus” becomes “walruses,” “bus” becomes “buses,” “class” becomes “classes.” Not too bad. But there are some words that, instead of just getting an additional -es, get a different ending altogether.” -
Pluralisation/singularisation in English is hard (and things get even harder when you want to support other languages!)
A lot of people deliberately choose the plural form when naming a database, so we try to intelligently singularise it, which is what you are experiencing.
I am curious why you would choose a surname or planet name as the name of a database?
In general, database names should be common nouns, not proper nouns.
I am curious why you would choose a surname or planet name as the name of a database?
In general, database names should be common nouns, not proper nouns.
Because I want to!!! (Answer 01)
(Answer 02)
Because I am sharing a space with a ‘collaborator’ or whatever you guys call them and he is another vendor we work with and we share many clients.
He is getting access to this. These mutual clients are all surgeons and we all (both on his side and our side) refer to them by their last names.
I’m sure I could go a more complex route of permissions, granularity, and the like, but I have a meeting in a few hours and I’m going to make it as easy as possible.
Let’s say his name was Dr. Venus.
Nice and easy until you run into Create a New Venu!
As a further update, I’ve looked and seen it’s how the label is presented. See the image below:
The database is indeed Vitenas, but the label is VITENA
We can discuss the logic in creating a space named after a single collaborator, but I was pointing out that it rarely makes sense to name a database with a proper noun.
How many Vitenas entities are there going to be?
Oh, I meant database Not space. In the image I pasted above, I made the space and initially called it Vitenas, but renamed it Logan (it’s a space for this collaborator to use) - And I’m giving you this feedback so you can see how people use it. My Space is Logan - for collaborator Logan. The database is Vitenas - for that shared client.
What I was trying (confusingly) to show in that image I posted was the label VITENA and, towards, the bottom, under Levels the correct naming of the database Vitenas. So it was really about that label.
Remember, I’m doing fine with this - nothing needs to change for me! This is how I’m using it and maybe future users too. I know you like to see how people use things.
So why would you name a database of entities with the surname of the client?
What do the entities in this database actually represent? Meetings? Notes? Projects?
I still am yet to grasp why you would use a proper noun for category of things …
Chr1sG is right, your structure does not seems to be correct.
If I understand correctly, you have a Space dedicated to a collaborator. Then you have a database for a “shared client”.
Why not creating a Space “Relations” or “Contacts” and then creating a Database “Clients” ? There you can create a People field and assign your client to Logan.
