Andy, Sorry, one of those situations where I saw what I wanted top see not what was actually there. Mmmmm!
Dave Crozier -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Davies Sent: 01 March 2007 16:53 To: profox@leafe.com Subject: RE: Updating a table for another table >Andy, >Looks fine to me. Just exactly what were you expecting? >Records two and three get updated and are shown to be so in the XML. > >Dave Crozier I get both [pending] updates shown in the xml - but in the browse, record two (the second update) has been updated - despite the tablerevert() record three ('tree') is not updated Andrew Davies MBCS CITP - AndyD 8-)# ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. Please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] with any queries. ********************************************************************** [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
