[AccessD] Logic issue

Here's a different solution!
If you have a checkbox for each title or position that can be applicable to
each person represented through the database then, on the client form of any
of people the list the checkboxes will indicate positives for the applicable
option.
So, Jack Jones can have the boxes ticked for Defence attorney, prosecuting
attorney, Judge etc. etc. The final checkbox (no 9 on my sample) can be set
to "Other" and have an associated textbox in the table which will only be
displayed it no 9 is ticked and the text will be entered into the open,
blank textbox for storage and later retrieval.
The trick here is to combine the bit value of each checkbox to obtain a
unique value for the combination of boxes ticked.
I have a small database of the principle as a working example which I can
forward to anybody who would like to see it.
The AccessD list is limited to a 30K unit size and will not allow me to
attach the sample to this text

Kind regards,
 
Frank Hill

Kind regards,
 
Frank Hill

 

-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of John Clark
Sent: 24 August 2005 18:36
To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: [AccessD] Logic issue

Hi all

I am having trouble working out how I want to go about something, and I
am hoping somebody here can give me a nudge. It doesn't sound difficult,
but I'm running into dead-ends. I am starting to think that I will just
have to go ahead and finish up with "whatever" and work around things.

I am doing a project for a district attorney's office, and it will
basically just keep tabs on everybody that passes through the system.
The problem is though that there are "Defendants", defense lawyers,
prosecuting lawyers, judges, and victims, and it isn't rare for a single
person to cross into multiple lists. And, theoretically, it is possible
to be in all lists. For instance there are many prosecuting lawyers that
become defense attorneys, and it is not unlikely that one of these
attorneys could be a judge in the future. That scenario is very
possible, and you can add it that a lawyer is very able to be a victim,
and hell, we all know they can be criminals ;) Another scenario that
happens very frequently, is that a person is both a defendant and a
victim. 

I don't want the person entering data to scroll through hundreds, and
eventually thousands, of names to pick an attorney's name from among the
list of everybody else in the system.

The idea I am working on presently is to add logical fields for each
designation to the table of names. For instances:

kNameID
txtLastName
txtFirstName
txtMI
txtSuffix
logAttorney
logADA
logJudge
logVictim
logDefendant

If I do this, I will have removed some fields that are currently there,
such as:

txtAddress1
txtAddress2
txtCity
txtSt
txtZip
txtPhone

And, I will put these in another linked table. There may be a need to
have multiple addresses for the defendants, so this would be best I
think.

The problem that I am foreseeing here...I'm not at that point, so my
fears could be unfounded...is setting these fields to true and/or false,
as needed.  Basically, thinking of victims for a minute here, the
defendant screen, which will actually be an "Indictment" screen, will
have a subform to hold potentially many victims for the indictment. If a
victim IS already in the system as something else, I will need to tag
that name as a victim and I'm wondering if this will present
difficulties.

Well, I hope I am being clear enough. If anyone out there has any tips
for me, I would greatly appreciate it if you would pass them along.

Thank you!

John W Clark
-- 
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com