After translation of Q&A databases and merging two applications, you find two databases in an application with two forms, one in each database.  What I really need is  to merge this two databases along with the forms. So I would have two forms within one database. If the elements with the same name could be  bound to the same database field automatically, it would be a bonus and a lot of reduction of work. I have to do this task quite frequently and I end up making new 2nd form in the first database- exactly the same as the form in the second database and binding a number of elements to the existing fields that is bound to form elements of the first form.

Is there a easy way to accomplish this, having to make the exact form but in different database. At present, Sesame allows to copy a form in the same database, unfortunately that does not help the given scenerio. Is there any new feature to help this in version 2.0?  Is there an easier way to do this in the current version?

In Q&A, I found myself most of the times working in @add mode , while in Sesame it is very convenient to work in update mode because of availability of different design option, where you can bind  elements from different forms to the same database field and there is no need to xlookup or copy to be done while entering data in update mode especially to the elements bounded to the same field. This also avoid duplication of data and conserve resources.  Am I making any sense?

Didn't mean to leave this up in the air. As per your suggestion we are looking into what we can do in 2.0

NOTE: Please do not interpret the following post as an argument that this is not a valuable and desirable feature. It is a good feature and I would like to implement it, if possible. I am simply discussing with you the issues involved with doing so.
------------------------------------

Actually, I've been looking at this and it's thorny.  Since building the Form also builds the underlying database, simply dropping a Form whole into an existing data structure creates some issues. It's one of those cases where, no matter what decisions I make, it's the wrong choice for half the people who use it. And it's not a case of a simple yes/no option. I find myself facing questions like "Do I bind the LE's to the existing fields, if the names match?" "What if there is no match?" "Do I unbind or do I create fields?" "What if the field names match, but the data types are different?" "Do I try to match the field (bound) names or the LE names?" "How will the user know what ended up unbound and what didn't?" and so on...

Erika,

What if we could copy the form, but with all the elements unbound? (And forget the programming - we can either import or cut & paste that in.)

I think it would be easier to go through the elements and manually bind them to the fields, than it would be to recreate the elements and their size, look, color, font, font size, position, tabs, etc.

Quote:


Glad to hear that. Will it have to wait till version 2.0?

Here]s a thought about an approach to consider..

Since you can make a loop for all the elements and their positions, could that be written out to a file and them read that file onto a new blank form with some type of macro?

All that would be in the background., but it could become a par of functions called from the Main Menu or a Menu Tree Branch:
1.  ExportForm(DestinationFile) to collect layout type of properties of all LEs
2.  ImportForm(SourceFile) to read the file, look at the element and its properties, and create the elements, duplicating the properties.

This would eliminate the issues of whether or not elements are bound.
--------------------
Probably many good reasons why this would not work, but just a brainstorming idea to throw on the table.  This is definiely a long overdue tool that is needed.  Thanks again for listening.

Quote:


Speaking from the "Joe User" viewpoint, would it be possible to have a setting or switch or option that would show bound and unbound as different colors?

Or just make you choose either bound or unbound once you opened the copied form? A listing then pops up where you choose either bound or unbound (little check boxes?) then offers the ones you want bound on one side and the fields available on the other, just line em up

(I know this is probably 6 years of work so I am NOT going to hold my breath....unless you would prefer that I do... )

Whoa! Got to tell madam swami that crystal ball she sold me really works