Select Row in sub form - set value in another sub form

[edkocol]

I want to guarantee that a check box in subFormB is set to False when ever any row is selected/navigated to in subFormA.

I'm at a loss on how to do that. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

[gemma-the-husky]

i don't really understand. it's hard to see why subformB should depend on something in subformA

however, given a parent form, with two subforms you can generally use this sort of code to interface between them.

parent!othersubform.form!fieldname etc

if you just mean that changing subformA should mean subformB requeries, then something like this ...

parent!subformB.form.requery

 

[edkocol]

Yes I probably did not explain it well enough. Sorry.

SubFormA is a collection of rows that essentially falls into two categories. If one of the two categories of rows is selected I want and unbound check box to not only appear but to be initialized to false (unchecked). The other category of rows hides the check box and its state is of no concern to this second category.

SubFormB is a one to one row of data relationship to the row selected in SubFormA. When the user is presented with the row (selected in SubFormA) with the check box visible I want the check box unchecked and the user must purposefully check the box if the want a particular action to occur "After Update".

I have the visible/hide function working. I have the True value of the check box working on "After Update" what happens now is if I select a different row in SubFomA (of the category that has the check box visible) the check box is still checked and that could unknowingly affect the "After Update" if the user "overlooks" the check box state.

HTH to understand what I'm after. The key to the design is based on the row selected in SubFormA and how that affects the unbound check box state in SunFormB.

 

[gemma-the-husky]

use the current event of subformA

either your system will sutomatically reflect the change in subformB - or you can try one of the codes i already mentioned.

having said that - it seems strange that changing anything in one subform should need to cause changes in a different subform.