Re: Storing Foreign Key in a table

The use of lookup fields in tables is discouraged by most developers for a
number of reasons you can go into if you wish, although it may be simplest
for now to agree that lookup fields are to be avoided. Lookup tables are an
entirely different matter.
I can't make out what you mean by storing "the text of the foreign key to
make the table easier to read when in data*** view." A few possibly
relevant thoughts:
You don't enter the foreign key field; rather, it is populated because of
its relationship to the primary key field (which is in another table). A
form / subform is the usual way to accomplish this.
A combo box based on a lookup field will in most cases work like a combo box
you create by other means. In any case, in order for a combo box to display
a value as you navigate from one record to another it needs to be bound to a
field or populated by code.
It would be best if you describe what you are doing, both in real-world
(non-database terms) and by describing the structure and relationship. If
the structure and relationships part is the question, just describe what you
are trying to do.

"CoachBarkerOJPW" <CoachBarkerOJPW@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message news:C51FE282-23CA-4220-95BB-32A6CD52E7FB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I was wondering after reading some comments about table design. Is it wrong
to use a lookup in a table to store the text of the foreign key to make
the
table easier to read when in datat *** view? I am a student and have
been
using a lookup in my tables because it is easier to initially input data
into
the table if you don't have to keep checking to see what the value of a
foreign key is. Also will using a lookup prevent a combo box on a form
from
displaying a value. My combo boxes load but do not display a value.


.

Loading