miscellany at mvps.org
Thu Jul 5 00:28:49 CDT 2007
A.D., I so enjoyed your use of the terminology "a case of multiplied pitfall". :-) I was very interested to see your discussion, so thanks for doing it. In particular, I would certainly expect a control named the same as the name of *another* field in the form's record source, to eventually cause a hiccup. Regards Steve A.D.TEJPAL wrote: > Jim, > > Thanks for making the file available for study. My findings are placed in the note appended below. Certain factors as brought out are suspected to have contributed to the inconsistent behavior mentioned in your post. I understand this is a db that was handed over to you. Of course, if it had been your own creation, the aberrations would not have crept in. > > A gist of the findings: > (a) A particular bound control is named as per a field other than its actual control source. Moreover, the name of its source field is a reserved word (Name). Combination of these factors makes it a case of multiplied pitfall. > (b) Embedded quote in field name. Better avoid. > (c) Lookup fields used in tables. Not considered desirable. > (d) Subdatasheet property of tables is Auto. It should be set to None. > (e) In many cases, table column headings are at variance with field names. Better keep the tables simple & straightforward. Instead, the objective can be met through suitable captions on form labels. > > As mentioned by you, the problem experienced at your end has been surfacing intermittently. In limited tests at my end, no abnormality could be detected. > > However, it can be expected that if the points brought out above (details in the note below) are attended to and even with names of pure bound controls kept same as their source fields, the db should perform consistently. Simultaneously, it has to be ensured that the names of unbound and calculated controls never coincide with any field name in the record source.
More information about the AccessD mailing list