MartyConnelly
martyconnelly at shaw.ca
Mon Mar 29 19:45:24 CST 2004
I was hoping for "Bounders" and "Cads" John Bartow wrote: >I guess maybe "nay-sayers" had a negative connotation to it. > >Next time I think I'll call the opposing views "Shirts" and "Skins". Maybe >we'll get more people participating :o) > >-----Original Message----- >From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com >[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of >DWUTKA at marlow.com >Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 3:51 PM >To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com >Subject: RE: [AccessD] Lookup Fields in Table Design > > >Thank you. I've had my opinion changed on this list before too. And I >always learn something new in here. But I was wondering if I was starting >to lose it, because I hadn't seen any solid 'evidence' from the nay-sayers. >That's all I was asking for. Reproducable results. It was very easy for me >to reproduce the Date Table 'examples', and see that they are definitely >more efficient then using calculations in a query, for sorting and >searching. > >Just haven't seen anything like that with the Lookup topic. Which isn't >surprising though. It is something that has been mystified in the >'relational database' world. It's in books, on the web, and thus is >defended simply by pointing to other references. Those are the hardest >walls to topple. It's a paradigm. > >Drew > >-----Original Message----- >From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com >[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of John Bartow >Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 3:16 PM >To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving >Subject: RE: [AccessD] Lookup Fields in Table Design > > >I started the thread decidely not using lookup properties for the past 5 >years because of the overwhelming attitude among developers that it >shouldn't be used. (IIRC that's when I first read Dev's "10 Commandments".) > >I had no "side" in this debate other than pointing out weaknesses I saw in >specific arguments (and being "cutesy" at times) Rarely is someone go to >fully switch "sides" in a debate. (So I don't expect everyone to agree with >me.) I believe that, based on this thread, the people who argued that it is >OK to use lookup properties have won the day. > >Unless someone comes up with a solid reason why it should never be used I >will not hesitate to use it again when the situation warrants. > >I challenge anyone to use facts to convince me otherwise. In fact I would >very much appreciate it. And I'll buy you a few if you can do so! > >John "always open to the facts" Bartow > > >-----Original Message----- >From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com >[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Charlotte >Foust >Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 2:44 PM >To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving >Subject: RE: [AccessD] Lookup Fields in Table Design > > >Forget it. You insist that your opinion carried the day. Go right >ahead and believe it, but don't expect everyone else to agree. > >Charlotte Foust > > >-- >_______________________________________________ >AccessD mailing list >AccessD at databaseadvisors.com >http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd >Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com >-- >_______________________________________________ >AccessD mailing list >AccessD at databaseadvisors.com >http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd >Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > > > > -- Marty Connelly Victoria, B.C. Canada