Thank you. Can you explain the problems you have.
Thank you. Can you explain the problems you have.
If this helped, please click the star at the bottom left of this posting and add to my reputation . Many thanks.
Bob Fitzpatrick
Yay! It worked!
1. Methodology 2: This is supposed to be a tick-box on the form. I'm not sure if it is possible to run queries on both methodologies without it going funny i.e. duplicate entries.
2. All of my queries that i have tried go funny when I try to add in country or supplier. I think its because of the way I've chosen to have them input. I have the two columns, one for countries requested and one for countries confirmed because I couldn't query countries properly with the tick boxes of yes / no.. so I've tried it this way and still can't get it right.
Can we start there?
I don't really understand what you are trying to do.
a)What form? maybe: FLS 2013 Project Form1. Methodology 2: This is supposed to be a tick-box on the form.
b)In the table "Projects", you have a text type field called "Methodology 2". There are no values stored in this field. If it is to hold values from the table called "Methodology 2" it will need to be number type (like Methodology1).
c)How can "Methodology 2", which is derived from a table that already has three values, be represented on a form be a tick-box?
If this helped, please click the star at the bottom left of this posting and add to my reputation . Many thanks.
Bob Fitzpatrick
Ok, so yes, it's on the FLS project form. I had to delete the tick box (select multiple) in order to convert this DB to 2003. This tick box is supposed to be populated with the info on the methodology 2 table. I can't even remember how I did that. I think it was in design mode of the table 'projects' under lookup I changed to to 'allow multiple'. I think thats what gave me the tick box.
Because our project managers use multiple methodologies for projects. We are trying to keep it very simple so I thought tick-box was the best way?
If you take a look at the report: methodology.....
because we use more than 1 methodology.. when I query, I get multiple (duplicate) results. My boss does not like that, what can I do?
"multivalued lists" are indeed a new feature in access 2007 so they are something that I have no experience with. If you want to continue using them, I would suggest you start a new thread and try to find someone with the relevant experience to help.
I have read a little about them at: http://office.microsoft.com/en-gb/ac...010031117.aspx where it states:I would say this though. I don't like the sound of "Multivalued" fields. IMHO each field should hold one piece of data. The fact that Microsoft has seen fit to introduce them does not necessarily mean they are a good thing. I'm sure this is a view that I have seen aired in this and other Access forums by users with far more knowledge and wisdom than I am ever likely to have.Note The new lists take their data from another database component called a multivalued lookup field. You must have a multivalued lookup field in one of your database tables before you can create multivalued lists. Explaining how to create multivalued lookup fields is beyond the scope of this article.
For information about creating a multivalued lookup field, see the articles Add or change a lookup field that lets you store multiple values and Guide to multivalued fields.
If you would like to explore other ways of storing and displaying the data I am, of course, still willing to help.
If this helped, please click the star at the bottom left of this posting and add to my reputation . Many thanks.
Bob Fitzpatrick
Bob, if you have a better and/or less complicated suggestion.. PLEASE TELL ME!
Also, any advice for querying and reports when it comes to the countries and methodologies? We have multiple countries and methodologies for each project. I would just like to simplify the results of a query or report. I've done grouping that is on methodologies report... I'm just wondering if there is a way to adjust it so it doesn't report the same project twice or more?
I'm not sure that I have either of those, just that I am willing to explore some alternatives with you.Bob, if you have a better and/or less complicated suggestion.. PLEASE TELL ME!
To start with:Then perhaps it would be better to have tables for methodologies like you have for Countries, so that you can store multiple methodologies for each project.We have multiple countries and methodologies for each project.
Perhaps you would only need one table for all methodologies.
If this helped, please click the star at the bottom left of this posting and add to my reputation . Many thanks.
Bob Fitzpatrick
I've just been looking a little closer at your table structure and I think that even the multiple countries should be handled a little differently. You have two tables storing country names (Countries and Confirmed Countries) but both tables have the same records. "ConCountryID" in table "ProjectCountries" should be joined to table "Countries" (like "ReqCountryID" is) making table "Confirmed Countries" redundant. As the two country tables have different Primary Key values, the data stored in ConCountryID would need to be updated. This could probably be done with an update query or some code if changing the values by hand is too onerous.
If this helped, please click the star at the bottom left of this posting and add to my reputation . Many thanks.
Bob Fitzpatrick
For countries: we have countries that are requested for a project and there are the countries that are actually approved for the project. when you say 'join' do you mean like a joining table with foreign keys. I just wasn't sure if I took the info for both columns from the same table if there would be a problem. I wasn't sure if it would cause a problem if I needed to query both requested and confirmed countries
Take a look at the attached db.
If this helped, please click the star at the bottom left of this posting and add to my reputation . Many thanks.
Bob Fitzpatrick
when i try to open anything on the db you just gave me it does this!
Yes, I had the same problem with the db that you attached. I think this is because of the change to A2003 and the non supported features. This would need to be looked at, but first you would need to sort out the table structure. Take a look at the relationships and the "Project Countries" table to answer your question in post # 56.
If this helped, please click the star at the bottom left of this posting and add to my reputation . Many thanks.
Bob Fitzpatrick