[AccessD] Mucking around

  Hermaphrodite. 

  Guess you need another table.

Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Stewart
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 11:44 AM
To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Mucking around

Mark,

Actually "mucking it up" if you do it any other way.
It is called normalization.  Let me guess, you wanted
to put all of the lookups into a single table and use
something like a category and then queries at each
combobox to limit them to a category. Why has this
design not died the death it deserves? Why do people
continue to try and use it?

Also a dogmatic Sagittarian, and a normalization purist.

And, yes, I have separate tables for things as simple
as Name Suffix. I do not care if there are only 3 or 4
records in the table. About the only thing I do not put
in a lookup is gender. And if someone comes up with a
3rd alternative, I will probably change that to a table
also. :-)

Robert

At 11:05 AM 9/26/2007, you wrote:
>Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 11:34:08 -0400
>From: "Susan Harkins" <ssharkins at gmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [AccessD] Mucking around
>To: "'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'"
>         <accessd at databaseadvisors.com>
>Message-ID: <46fa7bd4.2486460a.7e7f.0c93 at mx.google.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="US-ASCII"
>
>I would too, but mostly because the dogmatic Sagittarian in me likes it
that
>way. ;)
>
>Susan H.
>
>Simply put -yes.
>
>
>I meant if you had 30 completely different, not related drop downs...would
>you create 30 lookup tables?
>Example of dropdowns: State,Phone Type,Status,Name Prefix,ect...
>


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