Critique of first database (1 Viewer)

[Anakardian]

I have finally completed my first database from scratch and so far it seems to be doing its job.

I would like to invite you to give me some critique on it as I am sure I have made some things that could be improved or should never have been in the first place.

The sample database is only in the 2007 format as it seems I have used some functions that do not work in previous versions.
The database is split so you will need to redirect the frontend to the backend manually.
Remember to use the shift-key trick when opening.

 

[Simon_MT]

If you want us to look at your database please do so before you lock it down.

Your tables are not going to be where you have them and we need to re-link the tables.

Simon

 

[Simon_MT]

It looks pretty good. The most importantly is it clean. The Form icons can be removed as this is Access stating the obvious. This is a personal preference and you are welcome to keep them.

Some suggestions some the Forms like CircType et al would be better as a Continuous Form as users can see any entry that maybe needed to be added rather that try to duplicate a record.

Table Safety Meetings you could include a Field Containing:

S - Safety Meeeting
C - Crew Members
D - Deck Member
O - Officers
V - Vessel Management

This would enable to distribute Circulars to their target audience more easily.

Rather than a time interval on the Safety Meeting Table is to a date on the Circular. This way you an monitor when the Circular was supposed to be reviewed and when it it was actually reviewed.

What happens if the Circular is actionable?

Simon

 

[Anakardian]

Simon I did include the fact that it was a split database in the original post.
If you know how to un-split a database please let me know how this can be done.

I am not sure what you mean by "Form Icons".

With regards to the continuous forms I have had some trouble with those before and gave up on them. I can see the idea though so I will give it another try.

I see you found a name that no longer makes any sense on the safety meeting table.
Originally it was intended that these circulars should be discussed on a safety meeting but developments overtook the name and know I am not sure what would happen if I change the name.
Otherwise I would agree that it could be useful to have the options more detailed here. I will think on whether it is desirable to do so.

We chose to use the time interval as that follows how we normally require things to be done.
We normally do not require a reply to these as we currently have no good way to monitor whether it is actually reviewed as required. Sad but true.

If we require an action to be carried out, they have to reply by e-mail to a person handling their day-today business.

Thank you for taking the time to look at the database