Time

[alastair69]

Thanks

Scot i thank you very much for your help and it is appreciated.

I am sure with out your help/input i would of been a long time in working out the answer so please do not listen to others who try and make cheap shots at you.

Alastair

 

[Rich]

In both cases my advice was correct except for the typo of m/n

Well not quite, you did post your own definition of a parameter query, not consistent with that of Access, and you do use two queries when one will suffice, just a thought

 

[ScottGem]

Well not quite, you did post your own definition of a parameter query, not consistent with that of Access, and you do use two queries when one will suffice, just a thought

I disagree that my definition is "inconsistent" with Access. But more than that, most of the developers I know prefer using a form to supply criteria for a query then using the plain parameter prompt.

As for using 2 queries, if you were referring to the aging solution I don't think I said more than one query was required. Depending on how you want the result it could be done in one query.

In either case, neither point makes my answers incorrect since they do arrive at the same result. Whether another solution is better may be a matter for discussion. But to describe them as incorrect is, in itself, incorrect.

 

[Rich]

But to describe them as incorrect is, in itself, incorrect.

I never said anything about being incorrect

 

[ScottGem]

I never said anything about being incorrect

Umm Rich this is what you said:

In both cases my advice was correct except for the typo of m/n

Well not quite, you did post your own definition of a parameter query, not consistent with that of Access, and you do use two queries when one will suffice, just a thought

I think saying "not quite" to "my advice was correct" is saying it was incorrect.