>>>>>By the way when you add this field I would also add straight away an integer field Sequence. So users can sequence to their needs.
>>>>
>>>>If there's a need for that, or if that would make the users happier, so would I. If they don't really care (the list may be passed to another machine, not humans), I see no need to put gold plating on a styrofoam cup.
>>>
>>>Just a thought. A styrofoam cup could never exist if someone did not "goldplate" the process of making a cup in the first place.
>>
>>I used that particular cup as a symbol of something discardable. Not knowing the requirements in the case, adding a field for the end user to order by would be superfluous in case there was no end user (i.e. if it was just to be sent to another process which will use it in a manner we don't know).
>>
>>But yes, if there was an end user who wanted things in particular order (say, the set of records in case was a schedule template, or a default set for something that user will rearrange), then of course there's a reason.
>>
>>As for the process of making styrofoam cups, there was no goldplating. It was designed for a particular purpose, to replace the cardboard or thin plastic cups for hot drinks and heavier plastic stoneware (which cracked a lot after being washed repeatedly and had to be replaced frequently). It has absolutely no unnecessary designed features (except the "it's hot warning", but that wasn't there by design).
>
>It seems to me that to many, all advances are nothing more than gold-plating on an existing process. Previous processes are always thought of as good enough and advances are always thought of as superfluous. Unfortunately too often, those who prefer the previous process have gotten into such a rut, that a better way can't be demonstrated, suggested or even hinted at without carrying a flak jacket and an M-16. How tiresome has our race become?

Quite a conclusion to draw from a disagreement over FoxPro indexing techniques ;-)