Andrew Jensen wrote:
Hi Frank - et al.
Ah, you're right. Seems we need different icons for both, or a different
form of display. Somebody from the iTeam already suggested
Tables
+- Table 1
.
+- Table n
Queries
+- Query 1
.
+- Query m
but I am not sure I like this idea. The data to be displayed here is not
really tree-like by nature, and forcing it to be displayed as tree is
somewhat unusable, IMO. Perhaps a
(*) Tables ( ) Queries ( ) Both
+--------------------------------------------+
| Table 1 |
. .... .
| Table n |
. .... .
+--------------------------------------------+
My vote would be for the later approach. In this case then if the user
selects the *()Both* option I suppose the tables and queries are
listred together - in sorted order perhaps? Of course wouldn't one
then still need seperate icons to differentiate them? Perhaps though
I am missing a point here. Is there any difference now between a
table, a view and a query in the context of the query designer?
Not to me, anyway. :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
