Allow boolean fields to define the Reverse option

In working on views integration with my custom module recently I ran into an issue with a boolean field. The way my table was set up I had a field called 'privacy' that if left FALSE/0/NULL meant it was private and TRUE/1/NOT NULL meant it wasn't private. I attempted to set up a boolean field definition as found below

$data['my_table']['private'] = array(
    'title' => t('Privacy'),
    'help' => t('Whether or not the record is private.'),
    'field' => array(
      'handler' => 'views_handler_field_boolean',
      'click sortable' => TRUE,
      'output formats' => array(
        'private-notprivate' => array(t('Private'), t('Not Private')),
      ),
      'not' => TRUE,
    ),
    'filter' => array(
      'handler' => 'views_handler_filter_boolean_operator',
      'label' => t('Privacy'),
      'type' => 'yes-no',
      'use equal' => TRUE, // Use status = 1 instead of status <> 0 in WHERE statement
    ),
    'sort' => array(
      'handler' => 'views_handler_sort',
    ),
);

I passed the 'not' attribute of the field as TRUE hoping this would automatically reverse the boolean value or at least automatically check the 'not' form element in the options form. Alas it did not. I jumped on IRC had a chat with merlinofchaos realized that what I was attempting was not possible and so proposed making it possible.

This could happen one of two ways and I have provided a patch for either instance. First off views_data for boolean fields would be defined the same with the exception of now being able to pass a 'not' key as illustrated above. The two options for how to handle a field defining this are as follows.

1. We auto check the 'Reverse' checkbox.
   This option is provided for in patch 1. I personally don't like this option because it still allows the end user to muck it up and the developer is not able to account for his boolean field being in reverse easily.
2. We auto reverse the field by default.
   This allows the developer to more tightly control how his data is being used. The reverse checkbox is left unchecked. If the end user does check 'reverse' then we simply leave the value as is. This is in patch 2. This also provides for the instances where there is no definition of 'not' in the field definition

Those are the options. merlinofchaos said he was noncommittal about it either way. So I thought I'd put it up for some discussion. Either way i think it's a good feature to give views developers.