me.dirty

[Sandra Daigle]

Yes, you should definately try this. I don't think I understood the gist of
this particular problem until now.

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.

.....

what if i applied the same sort order to my query as i have my
compliex pk doing in the table?

ted

Are the buttons (Clear Grid and Apply Filter) missing or are they
visable but disabled? What happens if you click Edit "Delete
Columns" or "Clear Grid"?

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.

whooops....i might've spoken a tad toooo soooon.

before using the query having the added 'Time_on_List' calculated
field on
it as the control source for my forms, the availability of an
'Advanced Sort/Filter' button on the customized tool bar i give to
the user let the user remove the filter/sorting instructions by
clicking on it to reveal a query which he was asked to Clear Grid
for and then hit the 'Apply' filter button on the same toolbar; the
effect of that was to delete the filter/sort and allow the pk of the
underlying table (the former control source) to have their way and
sort the records by lastname, firstname, mi, medrecnumber.

now, with the query in the place of the table, this feature seems
unavailable to the user. the 'Advanced Sort/Filter' button opens to
a query revealing the filter and sorting criteria but there's no
way to remove/them!!!

any theories out there?


:

Ted,
Add the calculated field to your record source query and
sort by it. As in Select ... , [Date_on_list] - Now() AS
TimeOnList ...
Order by [Date_on_list] - Now()

But keep the control unbound.
Geof.
-----Original Message-----
let me just extend this thread a tad, sandra

can the calculated value be used to sort records either
in a form or a
report (say e.g. to list records in descending order
of "Time_on_List" when
the value of another control "Outcome" = 'Pending' or is
this restricted to
having the "Time_on_List" datum in the table and btw, i'm
with you 100% of
the way if your method means getting around the
constantly varying updated
fields i wrote about.

ted

ps: what's the big deal with the difference(s) btwn
a 'derived' vs a
'calculated' control? i'm relatively 'new' to a2k so it
seems like a
meaningless distinction.

:

In datasheet view or in continuous form this is the
nature of an *unbound*
control. An unbound control only has one value even
though it may be shown
multiple times when used in the detail section of a
continuous form.

Using a *calculated* control, where the ControlSource
is the expression, you
will see the correct value for each row.

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.


Ted wrote:
hi,

i didn't know that at the time, but earlier on when i
had it as an
unbound field and the user used a datasheet view of
the underlying
table to review the data (in edit off mode), the
value of the
Time_on_List variable would remain the same
throughout the column
until the record pointer moved to another record and
thenn the same
value would be displayed for every other record on
the screen. i
reasoned this was because of some datasheet artifact
that i could
live w/o and added the Time_on_List to my underlying
table.

ted

:

Ted,
Sandra Daigle beat me to it. If you make
time_on_list an
unbound control then the dirty property won't bother
you.
Geof.



.

 

[Guest]

and with that having been said, i did; meaning i am 'ordering' the fields of
my 'new' control source (the query) in the same way they are being arranged
by the pd: lastname, firstname, mi, medrecord, irb_number. i added a 'Remove
Filter' button to the toolbar, which when clicked seems to have the effect of
allowing the query to order itself according to the specifications i just
recited above. to me, it seems that nothing is being served by allowing the
'Advanced Filter/Sort' button to remain in the toolbar at this point.
previously, with the dependence upon the data table, it served as the step
just before clicking the 'Apply Fitler' button that was needed to delete the
user's filter/sort spec'ns. at this point, i am understanding us to be saying
that removing the filter/sort is not a possibility (as before) but that
removing it will have the effect of allowing for the desired sort order to
make its reappearance. also, that the user can subsequently use the 'Filter
By Form' button to generate another/different set of filter specifications
which can be 'removed' via the 'Remove Filter' button as stated before. does
this sound on point?

Yes, you should definately try this. I don't think I understood the gist of
this particular problem until now.

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.

.....

what if i applied the same sort order to my query as i have my
compliex pk doing in the table?

ted

Are the buttons (Clear Grid and Apply Filter) missing or are they
visable but disabled? What happens if you click Edit "Delete
Columns" or "Clear Grid"?

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.


Ted wrote:
whooops....i might've spoken a tad toooo soooon.

before using the query having the added 'Time_on_List' calculated
field on
it as the control source for my forms, the availability of an
'Advanced Sort/Filter' button on the customized tool bar i give to
the user let the user remove the filter/sorting instructions by
clicking on it to reveal a query which he was asked to Clear Grid
for and then hit the 'Apply' filter button on the same toolbar; the
effect of that was to delete the filter/sort and allow the pk of the
underlying table (the former control source) to have their way and
sort the records by lastname, firstname, mi, medrecnumber.

now, with the query in the place of the table, this feature seems
unavailable to the user. the 'Advanced Sort/Filter' button opens to
a query revealing the filter and sorting criteria but there's no
way to remove/them!!!

any theories out there?


:

Ted,
Add the calculated field to your record source query and
sort by it. As in Select ... , [Date_on_list] - Now() AS
TimeOnList ...
Order by [Date_on_list] - Now()

But keep the control unbound.
Geof.
-----Original Message-----
let me just extend this thread a tad, sandra

can the calculated value be used to sort records either
in a form or a
report (say e.g. to list records in descending order
of "Time_on_List" when
the value of another control "Outcome" = 'Pending' or is
this restricted to
having the "Time_on_List" datum in the table and btw, i'm
with you 100% of
the way if your method means getting around the
constantly varying updated
fields i wrote about.

ted

ps: what's the big deal with the difference(s) btwn
a 'derived' vs a
'calculated' control? i'm relatively 'new' to a2k so it
seems like a
meaningless distinction.

:

In datasheet view or in continuous form this is the
nature of an *unbound*
control. An unbound control only has one value even
though it may be shown
multiple times when used in the detail section of a
continuous form.

Using a *calculated* control, where the ControlSource
is the expression, you
will see the correct value for each row.

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.


Ted wrote:
hi,

i didn't know that at the time, but earlier on when i
had it as an
unbound field and the user used a datasheet view of
the underlying
table to review the data (in edit off mode), the
value of the
Time_on_List variable would remain the same
throughout the column
until the record pointer moved to another record and
thenn the same
value would be displayed for every other record on
the screen. i
reasoned this was because of some datasheet artifact
that i could
live w/o and added the Time_on_List to my underlying
table.

ted

:

Ted,
Sandra Daigle beat me to it. If you make
time_on_list an
unbound control then the dirty property won't bother
you.
Geof.



.

 

[Sandra Daigle]

Yes, it does to me. My forms are generally always based on queries with a
predefined sort order. When I want to go back to the original order I just
hit Remove Filter.

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.

and with that having been said, i did; meaning i am 'ordering' the
fields of my 'new' control source (the query) in the same way they
are being arranged by the pd: lastname, firstname, mi, medrecord,
irb_number. i added a 'Remove Filter' button to the toolbar, which
when clicked seems to have the effect of allowing the query to order
itself according to the specifications i just recited above. to me,
it seems that nothing is being served by allowing the 'Advanced
Filter/Sort' button to remain in the toolbar at this point.
previously, with the dependence upon the data table, it served as the
step just before clicking the 'Apply Fitler' button that was needed
to delete the user's filter/sort spec'ns. at this point, i am
understanding us to be saying that removing the filter/sort is not a
possibility (as before) but that removing it will have the effect of
allowing for the desired sort order to make its reappearance. also,
that the user can subsequently use the 'Filter By Form' button to
generate another/different set of filter specifications which can be
'removed' via the 'Remove Filter' button as stated before. does this
sound on point?

Yes, you should definately try this. I don't think I understood the
gist of this particular problem until now.

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.

.....

what if i applied the same sort order to my query as i have my
compliex pk doing in the table?

ted

:

Are the buttons (Clear Grid and Apply Filter) missing or are they
visable but disabled? What happens if you click Edit "Delete
Columns" or "Clear Grid"?

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.


Ted wrote:
whooops....i might've spoken a tad toooo soooon.

before using the query having the added 'Time_on_List' calculated
field on
it as the control source for my forms, the availability of an
'Advanced Sort/Filter' button on the customized tool bar i give to
the user let the user remove the filter/sorting instructions by
clicking on it to reveal a query which he was asked to Clear Grid
for and then hit the 'Apply' filter button on the same toolbar;
the effect of that was to delete the filter/sort and allow the pk
of the underlying table (the former control source) to have their
way and sort the records by lastname, firstname, mi, medrecnumber.

now, with the query in the place of the table, this feature seems
unavailable to the user. the 'Advanced Sort/Filter' button opens
to a query revealing the filter and sorting criteria but there's
no way to remove/them!!!

any theories out there?


:

Ted,
Add the calculated field to your record source query and
sort by it. As in Select ... , [Date_on_list] - Now() AS
TimeOnList ...
Order by [Date_on_list] - Now()

But keep the control unbound.
Geof.
-----Original Message-----
let me just extend this thread a tad, sandra

can the calculated value be used to sort records either
in a form or a
report (say e.g. to list records in descending order
of "Time_on_List" when
the value of another control "Outcome" = 'Pending' or is
this restricted to
having the "Time_on_List" datum in the table and btw, i'm
with you 100% of
the way if your method means getting around the
constantly varying updated
fields i wrote about.

ted

ps: what's the big deal with the difference(s) btwn
a 'derived' vs a
'calculated' control? i'm relatively 'new' to a2k so it
seems like a
meaningless distinction.

:

In datasheet view or in continuous form this is the
nature of an *unbound*
control. An unbound control only has one value even
though it may be shown
multiple times when used in the detail section of a
continuous form.

Using a *calculated* control, where the ControlSource
is the expression, you
will see the correct value for each row.

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.


Ted wrote:
hi,

i didn't know that at the time, but earlier on when i
had it as an
unbound field and the user used a datasheet view of
the underlying
table to review the data (in edit off mode), the
value of the
Time_on_List variable would remain the same
throughout the column
until the record pointer moved to another record and
thenn the same
value would be displayed for every other record on
the screen. i
reasoned this was because of some datasheet artifact
that i could
live w/o and added the Time_on_List to my underlying
table.

ted

:

Ted,
Sandra Daigle beat me to it. If you make
time_on_list an
unbound control then the dirty property won't bother
you.
Geof.



.

 

[Guest]

i just discovered another dimension ofl this problem's i think may intereste
you....

if you are a user and want to use the 'Filter by Form' and to include/use
'Time_on_List' as a filter criterion, clicking on the the said control
reveals a drop-down arrow to the right and a scrolling litany of DATES! i
suppose this has something to do with the fact it's a calculated field; but
what? and how to get around this behavior or is it not technically possible?

ted

Yes, you should definately try this. I don't think I understood the gist of
this particular problem until now.

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.

.....

what if i applied the same sort order to my query as i have my
compliex pk doing in the table?

ted

Are the buttons (Clear Grid and Apply Filter) missing or are they
visable but disabled? What happens if you click Edit "Delete
Columns" or "Clear Grid"?

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.


Ted wrote:
whooops....i might've spoken a tad toooo soooon.

before using the query having the added 'Time_on_List' calculated
field on
it as the control source for my forms, the availability of an
'Advanced Sort/Filter' button on the customized tool bar i give to
the user let the user remove the filter/sorting instructions by
clicking on it to reveal a query which he was asked to Clear Grid
for and then hit the 'Apply' filter button on the same toolbar; the
effect of that was to delete the filter/sort and allow the pk of the
underlying table (the former control source) to have their way and
sort the records by lastname, firstname, mi, medrecnumber.

now, with the query in the place of the table, this feature seems
unavailable to the user. the 'Advanced Sort/Filter' button opens to
a query revealing the filter and sorting criteria but there's no
way to remove/them!!!

any theories out there?


:

Ted,
Add the calculated field to your record source query and
sort by it. As in Select ... , [Date_on_list] - Now() AS
TimeOnList ...
Order by [Date_on_list] - Now()

But keep the control unbound.
Geof.
-----Original Message-----
let me just extend this thread a tad, sandra

can the calculated value be used to sort records either
in a form or a
report (say e.g. to list records in descending order
of "Time_on_List" when
the value of another control "Outcome" = 'Pending' or is
this restricted to
having the "Time_on_List" datum in the table and btw, i'm
with you 100% of
the way if your method means getting around the
constantly varying updated
fields i wrote about.

ted

ps: what's the big deal with the difference(s) btwn
a 'derived' vs a
'calculated' control? i'm relatively 'new' to a2k so it
seems like a
meaningless distinction.

:

In datasheet view or in continuous form this is the
nature of an *unbound*
control. An unbound control only has one value even
though it may be shown
multiple times when used in the detail section of a
continuous form.

Using a *calculated* control, where the ControlSource
is the expression, you
will see the correct value for each row.

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.


Ted wrote:
hi,

i didn't know that at the time, but earlier on when i
had it as an
unbound field and the user used a datasheet view of
the underlying
table to review the data (in edit off mode), the
value of the
Time_on_List variable would remain the same
throughout the column
until the record pointer moved to another record and
thenn the same
value would be displayed for every other record on
the screen. i
reasoned this was because of some datasheet artifact
that i could
live w/o and added the Time_on_List to my underlying
table.

ted

:

Ted,
Sandra Daigle beat me to it. If you make
time_on_list an
unbound control then the dirty property won't bother
you.
Geof.



.

 

[Guest]

this might interest you as well sandra....

attempting to use the 'Time_on_List' control in a 'Filter By Form'
specification shows you that there's a drop-down arrow on that control which
leads to a scrollable listing of DATES, not days on list quantities, but
calendar days!!

kind of weird, but i suppose it's got something to do with "Time_on_List"
being calculated. still, i suspect my users will want the ideal...an ability
to filter using this value. or is that a technical impossibility?

ted

Yes, you should definately try this. I don't think I understood the gist of
this particular problem until now.

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.

.....

what if i applied the same sort order to my query as i have my
compliex pk doing in the table?

ted

Are the buttons (Clear Grid and Apply Filter) missing or are they
visable but disabled? What happens if you click Edit "Delete
Columns" or "Clear Grid"?

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.


Ted wrote:
whooops....i might've spoken a tad toooo soooon.

before using the query having the added 'Time_on_List' calculated
field on
it as the control source for my forms, the availability of an
'Advanced Sort/Filter' button on the customized tool bar i give to
the user let the user remove the filter/sorting instructions by
clicking on it to reveal a query which he was asked to Clear Grid
for and then hit the 'Apply' filter button on the same toolbar; the
effect of that was to delete the filter/sort and allow the pk of the
underlying table (the former control source) to have their way and
sort the records by lastname, firstname, mi, medrecnumber.

now, with the query in the place of the table, this feature seems
unavailable to the user. the 'Advanced Sort/Filter' button opens to
a query revealing the filter and sorting criteria but there's no
way to remove/them!!!

any theories out there?


:

Ted,
Add the calculated field to your record source query and
sort by it. As in Select ... , [Date_on_list] - Now() AS
TimeOnList ...
Order by [Date_on_list] - Now()

But keep the control unbound.
Geof.
-----Original Message-----
let me just extend this thread a tad, sandra

can the calculated value be used to sort records either
in a form or a
report (say e.g. to list records in descending order
of "Time_on_List" when
the value of another control "Outcome" = 'Pending' or is
this restricted to
having the "Time_on_List" datum in the table and btw, i'm
with you 100% of
the way if your method means getting around the
constantly varying updated
fields i wrote about.

ted

ps: what's the big deal with the difference(s) btwn
a 'derived' vs a
'calculated' control? i'm relatively 'new' to a2k so it
seems like a
meaningless distinction.

:

In datasheet view or in continuous form this is the
nature of an *unbound*
control. An unbound control only has one value even
though it may be shown
multiple times when used in the detail section of a
continuous form.

Using a *calculated* control, where the ControlSource
is the expression, you
will see the correct value for each row.

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.


Ted wrote:
hi,

i didn't know that at the time, but earlier on when i
had it as an
unbound field and the user used a datasheet view of
the underlying
table to review the data (in edit off mode), the
value of the
Time_on_List variable would remain the same
throughout the column
until the record pointer moved to another record and
thenn the same
value would be displayed for every other record on
the screen. i
reasoned this was because of some datasheet artifact
that i could
live w/o and added the Time_on_List to my underlying
table.

ted

:

Ted,
Sandra Daigle beat me to it. If you make
time_on_list an
unbound control then the dirty property won't bother
you.
Geof.



.

 

[John Vinson]

if you are a user and want to use the 'Filter by Form' and to include/use
'Time_on_List' as a filter criterion, clicking on the the said control
reveals a drop-down arrow to the right and a scrolling litany of DATES! i
suppose this has something to do with the fact it's a calculated field

No; it has to do with the fact that it's apparently a Date/Time field.
Durations should probably *not* be stored in a date/time field; what
are the units of Time_On_List? Seconds, Days, years?

John W. Vinson[MVP]
Join the online Access Chats
Tuesday 11am EDT - Thursday 3:30pm EDT
http://community.compuserve.com/msdevapps

 

[Sandra Daigle]

Hi John,

The field is a calcualted field in the Recordsource query. In his query it
should look something like this:

DateDiff("d",[Date_on_List],Date()) AS Time_On_List

According to help, DateDiff returns Variant (Long) so I'm not quite sure why
it is being treated as a date field in this situation. I tried wrapping the
function with the Cint function and it still treates the calcualted field as
a date field.

Now I'm confused.

 

[Sandra Daigle]

Hi Ted,

I'm seeing the same thing and I think that it is an indirect result of the
calcualtion (which is type casting the result as a date instead of Long).
Regardless, your users can still enter a number by just typing it in. Are
your users determined to use the drop down?

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.

this might interest you as well sandra....

attempting to use the 'Time_on_List' control in a 'Filter By Form'
specification shows you that there's a drop-down arrow on that
control which leads to a scrollable listing of DATES, not days on
list quantities, but calendar days!!

kind of weird, but i suppose it's got something to do with
"Time_on_List" being calculated. still, i suspect my users will want
the ideal...an ability to filter using this value. or is that a
technical impossibility?

ted

Yes, you should definately try this. I don't think I understood the
gist of this particular problem until now.

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.

.....

what if i applied the same sort order to my query as i have my
compliex pk doing in the table?

ted

:

Are the buttons (Clear Grid and Apply Filter) missing or are they
visable but disabled? What happens if you click Edit "Delete
Columns" or "Clear Grid"?

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.


Ted wrote:
whooops....i might've spoken a tad toooo soooon.

before using the query having the added 'Time_on_List' calculated
field on
it as the control source for my forms, the availability of an
'Advanced Sort/Filter' button on the customized tool bar i give to
the user let the user remove the filter/sorting instructions by
clicking on it to reveal a query which he was asked to Clear Grid
for and then hit the 'Apply' filter button on the same toolbar;
the effect of that was to delete the filter/sort and allow the pk
of the underlying table (the former control source) to have their
way and sort the records by lastname, firstname, mi, medrecnumber.

now, with the query in the place of the table, this feature seems
unavailable to the user. the 'Advanced Sort/Filter' button opens
to a query revealing the filter and sorting criteria but there's
no way to remove/them!!!

any theories out there?


:

Ted,
Add the calculated field to your record source query and
sort by it. As in Select ... , [Date_on_list] - Now() AS
TimeOnList ...
Order by [Date_on_list] - Now()

But keep the control unbound.
Geof.
-----Original Message-----
let me just extend this thread a tad, sandra

can the calculated value be used to sort records either
in a form or a
report (say e.g. to list records in descending order
of "Time_on_List" when
the value of another control "Outcome" = 'Pending' or is
this restricted to
having the "Time_on_List" datum in the table and btw, i'm
with you 100% of
the way if your method means getting around the
constantly varying updated
fields i wrote about.

ted

ps: what's the big deal with the difference(s) btwn
a 'derived' vs a
'calculated' control? i'm relatively 'new' to a2k so it
seems like a
meaningless distinction.

:

In datasheet view or in continuous form this is the
nature of an *unbound*
control. An unbound control only has one value even
though it may be shown
multiple times when used in the detail section of a
continuous form.

Using a *calculated* control, where the ControlSource
is the expression, you
will see the correct value for each row.

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.


Ted wrote:
hi,

i didn't know that at the time, but earlier on when i
had it as an
unbound field and the user used a datasheet view of
the underlying
table to review the data (in edit off mode), the
value of the
Time_on_List variable would remain the same
throughout the column
until the record pointer moved to another record and
thenn the same
value would be displayed for every other record on
the screen. i
reasoned this was because of some datasheet artifact
that i could
live w/o and added the Time_on_List to my underlying
table.

ted

:

Ted,
Sandra Daigle beat me to it. If you make
time_on_list an
unbound control then the dirty property won't bother
you.
Geof.



.

 

[Guest]

hi sandra,

having thought twice about the possibility that stretching this thread would
take it to the breaking point of being too far removed from the posted
subject heading i submitted another query to which Alan Browne generously
responded -- his suggestion, to format the properties of the calculated
control using the 'General Number' option worked perfectly! and i'd
supplement what i said by giving him the benefit of a reference to his
website which i checked out (useful information, definitely):
http://allenbrowne.com/tips.html

thanks again, looks like we're moving onwards and upwards


ted

Hi Ted,

I'm seeing the same thing and I think that it is an indirect result of the
calcualtion (which is type casting the result as a date instead of Long).
Regardless, your users can still enter a number by just typing it in. Are
your users determined to use the drop down?

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.

this might interest you as well sandra....

attempting to use the 'Time_on_List' control in a 'Filter By Form'
specification shows you that there's a drop-down arrow on that
control which leads to a scrollable listing of DATES, not days on
list quantities, but calendar days!!

kind of weird, but i suppose it's got something to do with
"Time_on_List" being calculated. still, i suspect my users will want
the ideal...an ability to filter using this value. or is that a
technical impossibility?

ted

Yes, you should definately try this. I don't think I understood the
gist of this particular problem until now.

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.


Ted wrote:
.....

what if i applied the same sort order to my query as i have my
compliex pk doing in the table?

ted

:

Are the buttons (Clear Grid and Apply Filter) missing or are they
visable but disabled? What happens if you click Edit "Delete
Columns" or "Clear Grid"?

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.


Ted wrote:
whooops....i might've spoken a tad toooo soooon.

before using the query having the added 'Time_on_List' calculated
field on
it as the control source for my forms, the availability of an
'Advanced Sort/Filter' button on the customized tool bar i give to
the user let the user remove the filter/sorting instructions by
clicking on it to reveal a query which he was asked to Clear Grid
for and then hit the 'Apply' filter button on the same toolbar;
the effect of that was to delete the filter/sort and allow the pk
of the underlying table (the former control source) to have their
way and sort the records by lastname, firstname, mi, medrecnumber.

now, with the query in the place of the table, this feature seems
unavailable to the user. the 'Advanced Sort/Filter' button opens
to a query revealing the filter and sorting criteria but there's
no way to remove/them!!!

any theories out there?


:

Ted,
Add the calculated field to your record source query and
sort by it. As in Select ... , [Date_on_list] - Now() AS
TimeOnList ...
Order by [Date_on_list] - Now()

But keep the control unbound.
Geof.
-----Original Message-----
let me just extend this thread a tad, sandra

can the calculated value be used to sort records either
in a form or a
report (say e.g. to list records in descending order
of "Time_on_List" when
the value of another control "Outcome" = 'Pending' or is
this restricted to
having the "Time_on_List" datum in the table and btw, i'm
with you 100% of
the way if your method means getting around the
constantly varying updated
fields i wrote about.

ted

ps: what's the big deal with the difference(s) btwn
a 'derived' vs a
'calculated' control? i'm relatively 'new' to a2k so it
seems like a
meaningless distinction.

:

In datasheet view or in continuous form this is the
nature of an *unbound*
control. An unbound control only has one value even
though it may be shown
multiple times when used in the detail section of a
continuous form.

Using a *calculated* control, where the ControlSource
is the expression, you
will see the correct value for each row.

--
Sandra Daigle [Microsoft Access MVP]
Please post all replies to the newsgroup.


Ted wrote:
hi,

i didn't know that at the time, but earlier on when i
had it as an
unbound field and the user used a datasheet view of
the underlying
table to review the data (in edit off mode), the
value of the
Time_on_List variable would remain the same
throughout the column
until the record pointer moved to another record and
thenn the same
value would be displayed for every other record on
the screen. i
reasoned this was because of some datasheet artifact
that i could
live w/o and added the Time_on_List to my underlying
table.

ted

:

Ted,
Sandra Daigle beat me to it. If you make
time_on_list an
unbound control then the dirty property won't bother
you.
Geof.



.

 

[John Vinson]

Hi John,

The field is a calcualted field in the Recordsource query. In his query it
should look something like this:

DateDiff("d",[Date_on_List],Date()) AS Time_On_List

According to help, DateDiff returns Variant (Long) so I'm not quite sure why
it is being treated as a date field in this situation. I tried wrapping the
function with the Cint function and it still treates the calcualted field as
a date field.

Now I'm confused.

Well, my jumping into the middle of a long thread probably contributed
to the confusion - not that this isn't confusing enough already!

Looks like it's resolved, but why Time_On_List should be treated as a
date is a mystery to me!

John W. Vinson[MVP]
Join the online Access Chats
Tuesday 11am EDT - Thursday 3:30pm EDT
http://community.compuserve.com/msdevapps