MajP
You've got your good things, and you've got mine.
- Local time
- Today, 07:59
- Joined
- May 21, 2018
- Messages
- 9,951
Not trying to be a jerk, but trying to give some tough-love. it seems you are trying to outsmart everyone who has ever built a proper Access application. By making it less "complicated" you have come up with some very complicated way of doing things. I have made thousands and helped people with thousands of Access databases, but I cannot make heads or tails of what you are trying to do. I think what you want to do is a trivial application, and you are wasting a ton of time trying to come up with completely new ways to do things.My db is not relational. Everything is in one table so I've no need for P or F keys, and their complications. One table is so easy to update and maintain. You asked How are you relating tracks to albums. There's no relationship, the tarcks *are* the album.
So yes, this may be different to what is conventional, but will be better for us than any "nicely Formatted" music database as it's features are purpose built.
If you want to do this correctly we can help you come up with a very slick application with all kinds of Bells and Whistles, but you have to start over from scratch, IMO. People here will bend over backward to help you do things correctly. but sorry to say you will not get much support here on this because most people do not want to help people do things the wrong way. You need to get properly structured tables with good naming conventions. You can use standard Access bound forms done properly. Sure you can put a band-aid on what you have, but it is going to be one band-aid after another. What should be trivial will always be overly complicated.
It looks to me like you are building a Rube Golberg machine. You might get it to work, but is not easy.