Combo box referencing parent form and sibling subform?

[BonnieW via AccessMonster.com]

Hello!

I have a Form (Form A) with two subforms on it (Subform 1 and Subform 2),
each on a tab. Subform 1 has its own subform (Subsubform1). Each is bound
to their own table. Relationships are established between the underlying
tables and the form/subforms/subsubform. They go like this:
Form A (one)
--Subform 1 (many side of A-1 relationship; 1 side of subform-subsubform
relationship
----Subsubform 1 (many side of subform-subsubform relationship)
--Subform 2 (many side of A-2 relationship).

In Form A the user chooses an area (and some other info). in Subform 1 they
choose a date (and some other info). In Subsubform 1 they record specific
information about species and points within the greater area described in
Form A. In Subform 2 the user records specific information about species per
whole natural area. The various keys for these are all AutoNumbers. I need
the species list in Subform 2 to be limited to the species chosen in Subform
1 for the area chosen in Form A.

I cannot for the life of me figure out how to do this, although I know that
it should be pretty darned simple. Thanks in advance for any advice you can
offer.

 

[Jeff Boyce]

Bonnie

So it sounds like there's a relationship you didn't mention. The Species
(chosen in Subsubform1) is the "one" side of the one-to-many relationship
with the information you're getting at via SubForm2. If so, why is SubForm2
not "under" Subsubform1?

Regards

Jeff Boyce
Microsoft Office/Access MVP

 

[BonnieW via AccessMonster.com]

That relationship doesn't actually exist. The data tracked in Subform 2 are
really only loosely related to the data in Subform 1 or Subsubform 1- this
combo box manipulation is more or less a convenience for the data entryperson.
(Data in Subform 2 is a subjective valuation for the whole year based on many
sets of objective observations in Subform 1 and subsubform 1. This is
dependent upon natural area (chosen in Form) rather than the species, since
species status can vary from natural area to natural area.)

Thanks!

Bonnie

So it sounds like there's a relationship you didn't mention. The Species
(chosen in Subsubform1) is the "one" side of the one-to-many relationship
with the information you're getting at via SubForm2. If so, why is SubForm2
not "under" Subsubform1?

Regards

Jeff Boyce
Microsoft Office/Access MVP

Hello!

[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]

can
offer.

 

[Jeff Boyce]

Bonnie

In Access, it all starts with the data...

I'm having trouble visualizing the entities and relationships, so I'm
certainly not understand the "how" you have employed to show this (i.e., the
forms, subforms, etc.).

Please describe the data and relationships a bit further...

Regards

Jeff Boyce
Microsoft Office/Access MVP

That relationship doesn't actually exist. The data tracked in Subform 2
are
really only loosely related to the data in Subform 1 or Subsubform 1- this
combo box manipulation is more or less a convenience for the data
entryperson.
(Data in Subform 2 is a subjective valuation for the whole year based on
many
sets of objective observations in Subform 1 and subsubform 1. This is
dependent upon natural area (chosen in Form) rather than the species,
since
species status can vary from natural area to natural area.)

Thanks!

Bonnie

So it sounds like there's a relationship you didn't mention. The Species
(chosen in Subsubform1) is the "one" side of the one-to-many relationship
with the information you're getting at via SubForm2. If so, why is
SubForm2
not "under" Subsubform1?

Regards

Jeff Boyce
Microsoft Office/Access MVP

Hello!

[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]

can
offer.

 

[BonnieW via AccessMonster.com]

I actually managed to get this going using a slightly different method than
what I'd originally planned, but I'd be happy to type up what is likely an
entirely overcomplicated table structure for you, if you're interested.

Bonnie

In Access, it all starts with the data...

I'm having trouble visualizing the entities and relationships, so I'm
certainly not understand the "how" you have employed to show this (i.e., the
forms, subforms, etc.).

Please describe the data and relationships a bit further...

Regards

Jeff Boyce
Microsoft Office/Access MVP

That relationship doesn't actually exist. The data tracked in Subform 2
are

[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]

 

[Jeff Boyce]

Bonnie

I tend to get things running first, then, if I have time, make them pretty.

If you feel like typing, consider posting back a description of how you "got
this going", so other readers with a similar situation can see how you
solved it...

Regards

Jeff Boyce
Microsoft Office/Access MVP

I actually managed to get this going using a slightly different method than
what I'd originally planned, but I'd be happy to type up what is likely an
entirely overcomplicated table structure for you, if you're interested.

Bonnie

In Access, it all starts with the data...

I'm having trouble visualizing the entities and relationships, so I'm
certainly not understand the "how" you have employed to show this (i.e.,
the
forms, subforms, etc.).

Please describe the data and relationships a bit further...

Regards

Jeff Boyce
Microsoft Office/Access MVP

That relationship doesn't actually exist. The data tracked in Subform 2
are

[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]

can
offer.