Gustav Brock
Gustav at cactus.dk
Wed Dec 7 03:05:55 CST 2005
Hi Jürgen Ho ho, no one can stir the pot like you! /gustav PS: I hope your revised job conditions fits you well. And I'm sure you are worth every dollar you get paid. >>> jwelz at hotmail.com 06-12-2005 21:52:17 >>> Not all consumers of the verbiage generated at this list are skilled programmers nor do they all have frameworks. Many, I am sure, are not clear on normalization. Many are learning about coding, and I recall seeing questions about things such as input masks. Not everyone is equipped to handle every possible kind of record validation or data error in code. For some, limits on field size may well represent a meaningful restriction on data, one that may tune users in on the type of data expected and can help mitigate a failure to save records. Bald statements by highly regarded professionals that they do not restrict text field size without addressing the record size are as helpful as saying data conflict errors will significantly decrease or vanish if you just use unbound forms. It's a cure for a problem, but there are consequences. If you look at the history of the previous thread on this topic, you will realize that there are highly regarded developers with years of experience who did not know about or consider the matter of record size limitations so you can be certain that many people who browse for information here would benefit from a bit more than 'I set field size to 255 for all text fields. Some of the thread subjects on this topic remind me of that Monty Python skit/song Spam spam spam spam spam.... the last 10 posts on this topic read like a mutual admiration society. Ciao Jürgen Welz Edmonton, Alberta jwelz at hotmail.com