>>>>>>Hi Guys
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I have this form for maintaining bus operator details.
>>>>>>Now one operator (company) may be owned by another operator (company).
>>>>>>So the Operator table appears twice in the DE - one with alias "OPERATOR1" as opposed to the default.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The subject Operator table has a foreign key to its owner (ie another operator rec - which, btw, I don't have as a cyclic reln. in the DD). Just for the purposes of this form I have that pointing at the operator ID of OPERATOR1 in the DE. SO on the form I have a listbox to the OPERATOR1 "version" of the table, so that the subject operator's rec can have its owner selected froom the listbox.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Now then, only trouble is the listbox is empty at runtime. Now I developed this a few years ago and I can't see that I let this flaw go in testing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Any ideas? BTW it definitely is the same table USEDd AGAIN.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>'ppreciate it
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Terry
>>>>>
>>>>>UPDATE on this:
>>>>>
>>>>>In debug watch window I have dbf() function and this confirms that when I select either OPERATOR (initselalias)or OPERATOR1 (the reUSEd operator table, used to supply the listbox) they are indeed the same table (same path) BUT a browse of OPERATOR1 is empty, as if it's a different empty table.
>>>>>
>>>>>Really flummoxed over this one!
>>>>PMFJI, Filter?
>>>
>>>Filter - what?
>>>
>>>There are no filters - just the whole table supposed to be oin the listbox, as any operator can become the owner of another.
>>
>>Are you sure that there is no filter on the OPERATOR1?
>
>No, as I just said, there are no filters in the form. In fact, the only code assoc. with the listbox is the .interactivechange, where I place its value in a textbox. There are several listboxes on the page, each serving as a look-up to assoc. param. tables, each acting and set up exactly the same. Just this one where the same table used again, under an alias.
>
>UPDATE: I do apologise Beth. Yes there is, but not in the code, in the .filter prop. I'd forgotten that an operator can only be considered to be a potential owner if it is a holding company, ie with its holding company flag set. As none had, none appeared in the list. I've just checked 3 of them and now, of course, there are 3 in the list.
>
>In my defence: I think this is one of the very few times, if any, that I've used the filter prop, and I did write this several years ago. So as it is, I just stumbled on this while perusing and having ignored your suggestion. But I'll award you stars anyway :-)

Thanks, Terry

I just stumbled across this while checking other things on the site. I got stars, I got stars < dances wildly about the floor > >:)

Glad I could help.
Beth