Compiling multiple fields (Access 2000 SR1)

Topic

New Reply

I need to develop a database that assembles a complete item description based on the input of ten different fields. Please see the attachment which outlines an example.

Reply | Quote

Replies

Why do you have both a grouping order field (F1) AND separate fields for the grouping levels? One or the other seems superfluous.

Reply | Quote

Field F1 represents the order in which the fields F2-F10 need to be listed (i.e. the segment of the complete item number). F2 represents the group type, the example only lists one group but there are dozens. I’m definetly open to suggestions if there is an easier method.

Any assistance or guidance is appreciated.

Reply | Quote

The order suggested by the values in F1 is the same as the order of the fields F3-F10 in your example (F1 = 1 corresponds to F3/F4, F1 = 2 to F5, F1= 3 to F6, F1 = 4 to F7, F1 = 5 to F8 and F1 = 6 to F9/F10). Could it be otherwise for other examples?

Reply | Quote

Unfortunately it is different for other examples. I could send you the table if you like.

Reply | Quote

If you could post a more complete sample, that would be useful.

Reply | Quote

Here is the table. Again, any assistance is appreciated.

Reply | Quote

Couldn’t they have thought of a more logical setup? Is this the complete table, or are still other patterns possible now or in the future?

Reply | Quote

This should be a complete listing …. but who knows what they will come up with in the future .. it’s driving me crazy

Reply | Quote

I have attached your database with three queries added to it that I hope will do what you want.

qryCharacters divides the input value into individual characters.
qryParts computes each of the seven parts of the description.
qryDescription assembles the complete description.

I analyzed all patterns present in the current table, for example part 6 is determined by the combination of F2, F9, F10 and F11 OR by the combination of F2, F10 and F11 (with F9 blank) OR by the combination of F2, F8 and F9. Let’s hope that there won’t be other such patterns.

Note: the original example in your Word document was not compatible with the actual table.

Reply | Quote

This is exactly what is needed. Thank you very much!

Reply | Quote

This is exactly what is needed. Thank you very much!

Reply | Quote

I have attached your database with three queries added to it that I hope will do what you want.

qryCharacters divides the input value into individual characters.
qryParts computes each of the seven parts of the description.
qryDescription assembles the complete description.

I analyzed all patterns present in the current table, for example part 6 is determined by the combination of F2, F9, F10 and F11 OR by the combination of F2, F10 and F11 (with F9 blank) OR by the combination of F2, F8 and F9. Let’s hope that there won’t be other such patterns.

Note: the original example in your Word document was not compatible with the actual table.

Reply | Quote

This should be a complete listing …. but who knows what they will come up with in the future .. it’s driving me crazy

Reply | Quote

Couldn’t they have thought of a more logical setup? Is this the complete table, or are still other patterns possible now or in the future?

Reply | Quote

Here is the table. Again, any assistance is appreciated.

Reply | Quote

If you could post a more complete sample, that would be useful.

Reply | Quote

The order suggested by the values in F1 is the same as the order of the fields F3-F10 in your example (F1 = 1 corresponds to F3/F4, F1 = 2 to F5, F1= 3 to F6, F1 = 4 to F7, F1 = 5 to F8 and F1 = 6 to F9/F10). Could it be otherwise for other examples?

Reply | Quote

Field F1 represents the order in which the fields F2-F10 need to be listed (i.e. the segment of the complete item number). F2 represents the group type, the example only lists one group but there are dozens. I’m definetly open to suggestions if there is an easier method.

Any assistance or guidance is appreciated.

Reply | Quote

Why do you have both a grouping order field (F1) AND separate fields for the grouping levels? One or the other seems superfluous.

Reply | Quote