Thanks Rick for your response. I guess I don’t understand how it would work,
would I have a historical valuation table and store only old data or have all
the cost information in this table. Also in a report would I be able to list
the different valuations down the page one on top of each other or would they
have to be in a row. Also using the table method you still have to create a
field for every new valuation date and cost instead of having date field as a
heading and a number of revaluations underneath it. Or could you?
> Thanks Rick for your response. I guess I don’t understand how it
> would work, would I have a historical valuation table and store only
> old data or have all the cost information in this table.
All in one table. The one with the newest date is current while all others are
historical.
> Also in a
> report would I be able to list the different valuations down the page
> one on top of each other or would they have to be in a row.
The natural result would be a column, but you could use a custom function or a
subreport to display them in a row if desired.
> Also
> using the table method you still have to create a field for every new
> valuation date and cost instead of having date field as a heading and
> a number of revaluations underneath it. Or could you?
No. The separate table would contain a field or fields that link to the primary
table, a date field and the fields for your cost data. That one structure would
allow for an indefinite number of entries without adding any new fields.
This structure is very much like the classic sales order. There is a main order
record and many related line-item records for the items sold on the order. Any
order can have zero to (however many) line-items. Your structure could have
zero to (however many) cost entries.

Signature
I don't check the Email account attached
to this message. Send instead to...
RBrandt at Hunter dot com
Christopher W - 11 Aug 2005 02:44 GMT
Thanks mate, I understand now.
I have established the new cost table changed the relationship and moved all
the cost data in to this table. I have now reached the point of altering my
forms and can’t seem to get the sub form to work adequately. In the
transaction form I want to add only new asset data, this includes asset info,
manufacturer, client, industry classification and generic assets data coming
from drop down combo boxes and a sub form for the costing information. I
can’t seem to get it to only allow the entry of data; it seems to what to
keep looking up old data from the information put in to the previously
mentioned fields.
In order to overcome this I entered in the Transaction table ID as the Link
Master and Link Child in the sub form preferences. I also entered the go to
new record ‘Do command’ for ‘on open’ (in the sub form preferences). In
addition I programmed an already existing button ‘go to new entry’ to make
the sub form go to a new entry in addition to the master form
However, the sub form still keeps displaying data as I enter in data to the
master form. Please Help?
Thanks for all your help, this is better than gold!!
>> Thanks Rick for your response. I guess I don’t understand how it
>> would work, would I have a historical valuation table and store only
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>order can have zero to (however many) line-items. Your structure could have
>zero to (however many) cost entries.
Christopher W - 11 Aug 2005 07:22 GMT
Acually don't worry about it i have worked it out. I needed to put data
entry in preferences to yes. Thanks for all your help
>Thanks mate, I understand now.
>
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
>>order can have zero to (however many) line-items. Your structure could have
>>zero to (however many) cost entries.