I am hoping this will be an easy one for all you guru's out there. As
I am a beginner, I am still learning about the features of Access and
all its quirks. But to the point- I would like an input mask to show
the numbers as such: 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, ...
Option 1- The amount of numbers is determined on the number that is in
another field. So for example, Field A = 3, Field B = #, #, # (The
numbers may be decimals).
Option 2- If it doesn't work to base the number of #'s on another
field, then an input mask for field B that would work might get me by
enough.
Any thoughts or ideas?

-WhathaveIdone?

WhathaveIdone? wrote:
I created a new form and dropped 2 fields onto it; text0 and text2.
Text0 had input mask. Then I put this code in the dbl-click events for
the textboxes.

Private Sub Text0_DblClick(Cancel As Integer)
MsgBox Me.Text0.InputMask
Me.Text2.InputMask = Me.Text0.InputMask
End Sub
Private Sub Text2_DblClick(Cancel As Integer)
MsgBox Me.Text2.InputMask
End Sub

If I dbl-click Text2, there is no input mask. If I click on Text0, it
assigns the input mask of Text0 to Text2.

I have no idea if this helps since I did not understand your problem.

"WhathaveIdone?" <brasus04 (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote in
news:f3b3c09c-7cf9-4aad-8fc9-2f61a7e5f10a (AT) p11g2000prf (DOT) googlegroups.co
m:

You want to store a list of numbers in a field? That's a completely
incorrect design.

Tell us more about what real-life entities are being represented
here, and I'm sure a more conventional and correct implementation
can be come up with by readers of your post.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
contact via website only http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

On Aug 24, 12:45*pm, "David W. Fenton" <NoEm... (AT) SeeSignature (DOT) invalid>
wrote:
I understand this does not seem normalized. The problem is that each
group of these numbers is unique to each of the the Primary Field
[Product] records and will not be searchable for any reason. If this
seems like it still does not work. I also have thought about doing
something like:

Form1
Entry fields for tblInfo:
#1, #2, #3, etc
Then, I would concatenate them in the report.
Any thoughts? This option? Previous Option? Right direction? New
direction?

-Thanks for all the input by the way. I think this is great! Books
can't teach THIS stuff!
-WhathaveIdone?

If you are using Access 2007 or later, and the ACCDB database format, you
can have a multi-value field. As that does not provide access to the
normalized behind-the-scenes implementation, it is unnormalized and I don't
use it. But, I presume you have all the usual validation capability to
limit it to numbers, etc.

I also rarely use Input Masks... because they can be a pain to the user
unless the user is doing keyboard data entry and tabbing into each new
field... if, as many | most users, they move the mouse to a field, they'd
better move it to the utmost start position, or they'll have to retype.

A little more explanation of the list of numbers might help us to help you.
Or not. <GRIN> A normalized way would be to have the numbers in a related
table and concatenate them for display or report, or, just show them on
separate lines in a sub-report. But, sometimes we feel compelled to deviate
from normalization, if for nothing else than the way the users
view/understand/use the information.

--
Larry Linson, Microsoft Office Access MVP
Co-author: "Microsoft Access Small Business Solutions", published by Wiley
Access newsgroup support is alive and well in USENET
comp.databases.ms-access


"WhathaveIdone?" <brasus04 (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote

On Aug 24, 12:45 pm, "David W. Fenton" <NoEm... (AT) SeeSignature (DOT) invalid>
wrote:
I understand this does not seem normalized. The problem is that each
group of these numbers is unique to each of the the Primary Field
[Product] records and will not be searchable for any reason. If this
seems like it still does not work. I also have thought about doing
something like:

Form1
Entry fields for tblInfo:
#1, #2, #3, etc
Then, I would concatenate them in the report.
Any thoughts? This option? Previous Option? Right direction? New
direction?

-Thanks for all the input by the way. I think this is great! Books
can't teach THIS stuff!
-WhathaveIdone?

"Access Developer" <accdevel (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote in
news:8djh3rFfu6U1 (AT) mid (DOT) individual.net:

The other thing is that the numbers are surely not the data, but
somehow represent the actual data.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
contact via website only http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/