If the default of .F. is important, I suggest another field name, for instance obsolete, discontinued or simply inactive. At least to me, these words "sounds" better.

>I thought about possibility that Active could be reserved word but I only checked SQL Server reserved words. I will check the VFP too. Thank you for pointing it.
>The reason I may need to use the "reversed" logic is I want the field default to be .F. (maintaining default of .T. is more painful). Since the field default is .F. and the logical default "is active" I am kind of stuck in this "reversed" logic. I will have to think of how to get around it, possibly some other way.
>Thank you.
>
>>I strongly recommend that you DON'T use "reversed" boolean logic, there is no gain, and even you as the programmer will sooner or later get confused. Since Active is a reserved word, I recommend Isactive or Lactive as field name. If you use DBFs, you should also add a binary index tag to this field.
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>I am adding a field to the parts file that will allow user to check some parts as Active and some as Not Active. On the screen it will look very clear and unambiguous. The field (logical) will have default as .F. and named NOT_ACTIVE. When creating reports the user will use this field in the Stonefield Query named PART NOT ACTIVE. And if they want to include in the report only NOT active parts they will specify it as "PART NOT ACTIVE is True." Do you think that average user (person) will not be confused by this "reversed" Boolean logic?