Most naming conventions for Azure put resource types and other metadata in the resource name.
For me, this feels like a lot of unnecessary duplication, and leads to hard to read cryptic names full of abbreviations.
Most of the views or tools I use already show important metadata like resource type, location or resource group. For example, the "All resources" view has a column for the type and there is also a type specific icon right next to the resource name. Adding the type to the name feels like unnecessary duplication and makes the names harder to read.
We also try to manage our resources 100% via infrastructure as code. In terraform, when I specify a resource, I already have to include the type (for example "azurerm_storage_account.my_account_name").
When I work with the cli commands, they also include the type ("az storage ...", "az vm ...").
So what am I missing? What's the benefit of putting the type in the name?
The same goes for other metadata. Why duplicate things in the name that I already define as tags? If I want to see team name or application for example, then I define them as tag and add them as column to my resources view. Thats way easier to read then from the middle of some cryptic long resource name.
Is there actually a really good reason to also duplicate all these information in the resource name, or does everybody do it just because Microsoft recommends it? Wouldn't it make more sense to put all those metadata in tags and have a well defined tagging strategy?
