>>However, since the arrival of views I chose to let my tables in peace, and did all my modifications on views, letting tables either accept or reject those modifications. In doing so, I rest assured that tables only recieve valid data by update from views after user is done modifying the data.
>
>If the tables only receive valid data, why would they ever reject a change from a view?
>
>>One of the things I don't like about modifying tables is those unexpected crashes, often performed by unexperienced users, that leave tables with incomplete data. It has resulted in a corrupt table a few times, and one corrupt table is one too many.<
>
>When you use a view, the base tables are open as well. As soon as you TableUpdate() your view, the base tables are updated. I don't see how using views helps, here.

Yes, of course, Mark, but as I mentioned earlier, my tables will never crash in edit mode. They either accept or reject changes made on views. One of the reasons I do it that way is that I leave it up to users to fill out most of the fields, except primary key of course, and they won't be able to save those changes until all required fields are filled out. In a perfect world (and some discussions here a bit earlier) that also should be possible, but I didn't find time to invest into that yet.
You also made a good point, one that I neglected to cover, in your previous posting, namely Client/Server applications. If you're going for that option in your app setup, it only helps using views exclusively. I myself am in that situation.
We obviously don't approach the issue from the same angle, but isn't that after all what makes this world an exciting place? :-)

Best regards