I could not disagree more. I appreciate your efforts and hope that I can count on your assistance in the future. Your response was included in the notice I sent to David because I wanted him to see it. In fact I wanted to highlight your suggestion, that is why I italisized it. If David had nothing to add, it would then be easy for him to say, I HAVE NO OTHER IDEA'S BUT THE SAME ONE EDWARD HAS.

At any rate, I appologize if you took offence but I assure you nothing I have done was intended to be anything but positive and helpful to the discussion.

By the way, do you have any alternative suggestions/ideas/vodoo to resolve my FILTER issue?

>You can reread UT rules and see that you broke rule #14. However, I would not reply here, if you cut off my answer to your initial reply. You didn't do it, moreover you even highlight it (one more UT rule). I don't claim copyright on my replies, but it seems to me obvious that you took inappropriate way.
>
>>What do you mean "impolite"?? It was not intended to be anything but complimentary to UT and David. If you inform me as to the rule I have broken I will do all I can to avoid doing that in the future.
>>
>>By the way, your efforts were/are sincerely appreciated as well. I planned to respond to you when I came up with a solution that used FILTER. If I can not develop a solution that uses FILTER, I will use your excellent suggestion.
>>
>>>>Hello David,
>>>>
>>>>I appologize for sending this item to you directly, but I appear to be out of options. You have been more than helpfull with my questions in the past and I find myself stuck on an important issue to which I have recieved only one response. That response basically indicated that I can not do what I want to do. If you would take the time to review this issue and give me the benefit of your experience I would sincerely appreciate it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Here is the mission; should you choose to accept it...
>>>>I have five tables open in a DATA ENVIRONMENT for a form, 3 that are linked to each other and 2 FREE TABLES. The two FREE TABLES should be irrelavent here. I want one of the 3 linked tables (SALES) to control two other linked tables (SALE_LINES and PURCHASE_PARTNERS) in that environment.
>>>>
>>>>sales.sale_id is a Primary index
>>>>purchase_partners.sale_id is a Regular index.
>>>>sale_lines.sale_id is a Regular index
>>>>
>>>>In the data environment I have set the FILTER for PURCHASE_PARTNERS to purchase_partners.sale_id=sales.sale_id purchase_partners information is displayed on the form using typical controls; nothing unusual. This information is filtered properly and appears as expected in the form.
>>>>
>>>>In the data environment I have set the FILTER for SALE_LINES to sale_lines.sale_id=sales.sale_id. sale_lines information is displayed in a grid. The expected entries in my sale_lines grid appear correctly only when the form is first loaded. When I SKIP+1 in the sales table then grid simply shows no entries. If I SKIP-1 in the sales back to the original sale then the correct sale_line information for that sale is displayed in my grid.
>>>>
>>>>The sale_lines table filter does not seem to be changing as the sales change.
>>>>
>>>>I have spent 3 hours trying all the usual stuff, including:
>>>>- removing the tables from the data environment and readding them
>>>>- forcing the filter to update after my: SELECT SALES, SKIP+1, by doing a SELECT SALE_LINES, SET FILTER TO SALES_LINES.SALE_ID = SALES.SALE_ID
>>>>- checking the Help files
>>>>- swearing
>>>>Nothing has helped. I am now baffled. This can't be a limitation of VFP. A VFP table must be able to control two other tables in the same database using the filter command.
>>>>
>>>>Idea's???
>>>>
>>>>The most reliable way is to use parameterized view/cursor instead. Grids don't like filters (you can find some workaround to apply filter to grid, but it's really unstable).
>>>>Edward Pikman
>>>>Microsoft MVP/MCP - Visual Foxpro
>>>>C/S Specialist, Information Technology, BMI
>>>>212-830-8346, 718-951-4913
>>>
>>>Ian,
>>>
>>>I have to say that your post is really impolite and against UT rules.