Re: access 2003

Geoff:

Since Microsoft did not instruct me to remove the Me.FilterOn = False,
Me.Requery I was puzzled and could not understand the need for this portion
and wondering if I had missed something. In short, I believed more was to
yet to be revealed as a result of discovery or further explaination with
regard to upgrade or corrections from Acess 97 to Access 2000 or Access 2003.
I expected a patch from Microsoft to solve this problem. Your synopsis of
the filters actions and goals confirmed my thought process.

Geoff" wrote:

It's been a hectic week here too.

I was sorry that my earlier responses to your posts were a messy progression
towards enlightenment, particularly since you had often already posted
information that had clarified the situation but which simply wasn't
registering with me! Sometimes, it takes a while for the penny to drop!

I commented the line of code in the "Open Event" on the form
"Me.FilterOn=True" per Microsoft's instructions. For now, there do not
seem to be any related issues with the commenting of this code.
However, the "ChooseJob_AfterUpdate Event" uses this filter
"Me.FilterOn = False" before the Me.Requery portion of this event.

You probably already realise this but, given your above comment, I would say
this. I believe the purpose of the original two code lines in the
ChooseJob_AfterUpdate event (ie Me.FilterOn = False, Me.Requery) was as
follows: By the time the AfterUpdate code runs, the user has by now
selected a customer and a job in the ChooseCust and ChooseJob combo boxes,
so the query to which the form is bound now needs to be refreshed to enable
the form to show a new set of records: For, as you know, the query points to
the two combo boxes for criteria information. Therefore, Me.FilterOn=False
should make the form ignore the filter and allow the query to successfully
use the combo box criteria. I think the filter was intended to effectively
over-ride the criteria from the combo boxes so no records would show in the
form until after a customer and job number had been selected. I think the
original database developer(s) felt the filter needed to be turned off so
that Me.Requery will (or should) pull new records into the form based on the
query's combo box criteria. As we know, of course, that used to happen in
Access 97 but does not happen in Access 2003.

The reason I make this point is because your comment above implies that you
have not remmed out the Me.FilterOn=False code from the AfterUpdate event.
This doesn't do any harm, but equally, I don't see that it does any good
either. Assuming for one moment that you have not remmed out
Me.FilterOn=False, then I don't understand why you need to leave it in: For,
if you've remmed out Me.FilterOn=True in the Form_Open event, then the form
doesn't have a filter that needs to be turned off - not unless I'm still
missing something. (If my assumption is wrong and you have remmed out
Me.FilterOn=False, then just ignore this comment.)

My help with the conversion of the project is volunteer as I made a 360
degree career change a few years ago ... most likely I am not current on
all of the changes that affect Access 2003 from Access 97.


It has been two years since I've attempted to work with Access or any other
software related issues ... things do change and fast.

We're all in the same boat! Things change so fast, it's a constant battle to
keep up-to-date. You might like to search the Microsoft website from
time-to-time. You cannot be the only person who has (or will) experience
this problem. Sooner or later, an article is bound to appear on the website,
detailing a work-around or patch or service pack or something.

I will continue to post information that relates to this project as
received.

Many thanks. I'd like to hear what solution Microsoft come up with. I feel
pretty certain that Access should still work that way the original
developers of your database expected it to work.


Geoff:

Great idea to re-post as I am sure your are correct and other will surely
appreciate this information. Actually, I should copy and post all of your
responses as I thought they were right-on the target and considering that
fact that you did not have the database in your possession you were very
intutive. You are not the guru, sure could have fooled me.

You might like to re-post your query into a newsgroup specifically dealing
with Access Forms. A guru somewhere might know the solution.

Your idea or suggestion about the main form and a subform as a data***
view is a great one! In fact, that is my preferred choice of forms that
require a subform with multiple lines of information.

By the way, in a previous post, I suggested that, if you had to retain the
filter, your form might work if you re-did it as an unbound main form with
combo boxes and a bound sub-form to replace your current detail section. If
you experiement in this direction, you would need to requery the control
that contains the sub-form. The reason I suggested an unbound main form is
because it would allow you to display the sub-form in data*** view,
instead of continuous forms view. I don't know that that would necessarily
make any difference - it's just that I often prefer to see things in
data*** view. At present, you cannot use data*** view on the bound form
because, if you did, the combo boxes would disappear. That wouldn't happen
with an unbound main form.

Regards
Geoff


My goal is to respond back to the Microsoft prior to Monday, 8/07 and ask if they have posted a patch to deal with this type of a filter. I honestly did not get the impression this particular individual had experienced this problem or was aware. Trial and error (elimination of code, piece by piece) until the problem was re-created seemed to be the solution or way of discovery. That is exactly how I discovered what was creating the problem. As previously mentioned, I felt out of touch with technology and change and must surely be missing something very important that might have an affect that I was not thinking of. I normally like to start at the very end but in this case was missing too many pieces.

What a time consuming project his has been and such a tremendous help. Can
not possibly thank you enough for all of your efforts.

If more information develops I will post.

Regards,
doglover








.