Re: Open a form from a record in Querry result or Table

Tech-Archive recommends: Fix windows errors by optimizing your registry

From: David (David_at_discussions.microsoft.com)
Date: 07/23/04 

Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 04:25:01 -0700

Reggie,
Thanks for the comment.
Do you happen to know where I may find actual or sample codes to implement my requirement ? Recall I need to code a form so that it opens a query's nth record.

I am buying the set of bookcs published by Sybex on 2002 Acces.
Perhaps I will be able to find similar codes there.
But if you know exactly where to look, please let me know.

"Reggie" wrote:

> David, queries do not have events associated with them. Design a form and
> base the recordsource of the form to the query. The form has all the events
> you mention. If you want it to be displayed to look like the query result
> set the view of the form to data***.
>
> --
> Reggie
>
> ----------
> "David" <David@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5E330944-FF42-431C-BF4D-A9CFA2170BAF@microsoft.com...
> > Hi Jeff,
> > I am sorry the 100 column seems to have side-tracked my question.
> > Actually it doesn't matter if it is 10 or 100 columns, for my purpose.
> > I can repose my question is a different way:
> > I open a form.
> > It triggers a querry which produces so many rows of data on the screen.
> > When I click on (or mouse over) a row in the query result, I want my form
> to recognize that "event".
> > The questions is: how could the click on the query result be captured as
> an event by the form?
> > I look into the "properties" associated with a select query and do not
> find "events" associated with the the life of a select query.
> > I suppose some coding may be needed.
> > Any hints on how to get it done?
> > David
> >
> > "Jeff Boyce" wrote:
> >
> > > David
> > >
> > > !Red flag!
> > >
> > > Access is a relational database ... and it sounds like you have
> "committed
> > > spread***" on it! A look through the tablesdbdesign newsgroup will
> reveal
> > > that it is VERY uncommon to have more than 30 or so fields in a well
> > > normalized database design. ?100 fields?!
> > >
> > > We could discuss "how to's" for a long time, but unless you revisit the
> > > topic of normalization and consider revising your table structure, we
> will
> > > be trying to make Access do things it is neither intended nor designed
> to do
> > > well. Sorta like trying to drive nails with a chainsaw <g> ...
> > >
> > > You can do it, and even succeed, but it's a lot harder than using the
> > > correct tool, and the risk of "hurting yourself" is a lot higher.
> > >
> > > Good luck!
> > >
> > > Jeff Boyce
> > > <Access MVP>
> > >
> > >
>
>
>

Quantcast