I've just changed my customized version of Ebase to FileMaker V5, and wonder if there is any reason to retain the "102" file extensions previously used for the file. I'm guessing that the primary reason for using the "102" extension is to get the proper file association to the FileMaker runtime database provided with Ebase. After converting to FM V5, I'd actually prefer to employ the established file association between "fp5" extensions and the FileMaker V5 application installed on my machine, and I also find it a bit nicer to have the extensions which actually "clearly" indicate which program is associated. Let me add that my clients will make good use of ODBC and a couple other features which require upgrade to FM V5. We understand the need for and are prepared for purchase and installation of FileMaker V5 on machines using the database. I guess the short description is that I'm very tempted to switch all the Ebase file extensions to "fp5" after my conversion to FileMaker V5 format. Here are my information queries: 1. If anyone can explain reasons I should NOT change the file extensions, could you share them? 2. Could someone with expertise please verify whether I properly understood the reasons for use of the "102" extensions, or offer some clarification? Thanks much ************************** Larry Bednar 503.288.5137 [EMAIL PROTECTED] **************************
