J
JoeK2001
Yes, thank you both for your help. The new coding suggestions really helped
clean up the big mess I had.
After thinking over the whole logic of the form and how it works. It would
not be possible if it only worked for some but not the others (being the
entries over 50 characters). Therefore, I realized that it could not be the
coding's fault. I got confused because the coding before was not very
intuitive.
In the beginning, I had set the field size of the source table to 255 from
100, which would the existence of relatively long entries. However, I had
forgotten the linking of an indirect source, that had a field size that
remained at 50. Therefore that was the main problem.
Thank you both for the help. I had learned alot more about Access and its
inner workings. Especially the coding part that I am only mildly skill at.
Thanks Albert and David.
clean up the big mess I had.
After thinking over the whole logic of the form and how it works. It would
not be possible if it only worked for some but not the others (being the
entries over 50 characters). Therefore, I realized that it could not be the
coding's fault. I got confused because the coding before was not very
intuitive.
In the beginning, I had set the field size of the source table to 255 from
100, which would the existence of relatively long entries. However, I had
forgotten the linking of an indirect source, that had a field size that
remained at 50. Therefore that was the main problem.
Thank you both for the help. I had learned alot more about Access and its
inner workings. Especially the coding part that I am only mildly skill at.
Thanks Albert and David.