Ross,
Also, I forgot to mention the new 'self related' fields will not grant
access to enter anything in them either whereas the fields in FM6 did.
When you did that of course it also put the same data back in the
original file.
Lee
Ross Dickson wrote:
Lee,
I think what you're trying to do is a good way of meeting your data
entry goals.
When you say the related fields just do not work, what do you mean?
Are they just empty, or do they not exist? Can you enter some data in
them, and see where it ends up in the related record?
Perhaps you could create a second window showing all the fields in
your January record, which you can compare with the same layout for
the August record. Then you can be sure that the calculated field used
in the relationship is identical in both records.
Ross
Lee wrote:
Hi,
I've been travelling nicely on 8.5 for a while now, however, I've
just had to rebuild an old program of mine from FM6 into 8.5 In the
past all other rebuilds have been fine. However, on this occasion
I've met a brick wall in one area. In the previous FM6 version I had
a screen where a record was created in, say, January for a client and
the data entered, when that client had a second entry made at a later
date, in say August a self relationship would display on the right
side of the August screen the data that was entered for this client
on the January record.
The self relationship was based on a calculated field of 2 other
fields in that file. The same data fields were selected from the self
relationship
and placed on the right side of the screen thus showing what was
entered on the previous January record.
I have tried to do the same in 8.5 unfortunately while the self
relationship field is working and looks the same on both the January
and August record, the fields selected from that self relationship
just do not work and display nothing.
The reason for doing this exercise is that it saves the operator
having to search for the old record to compare data and then you
don't have the same data on the same screen.
Any suggestions please or is there another way to achieve the same
result.
Lee
--
