Wesley,

Yep, that's one of the observed problems. I'm sorry you did not get an earlier response that might have save your some time and work.

Off the subject entirely, what's an L.C. in your part of the world. In Nebraska we have an L.L.C, limited liability corporation, which always amuses me since all corporations limit liability.

Regards,

JME

>Jim:
>
>Thanks for the reply. In fact, I had contacted Doug Blank, and he said he was stumped by the issue and suggested using VFP 5.0 vs. 6.0. I did not find that a satisfactory resolve, so I started playing around with it, and eventually tracked the problem down to certain of the files in the visual class library. I opened 5.0 and 6.0 side by side, and . . . this is going to seem like a laborious approach . . . manually recreated the offending classes in 6.0. Once these "recreated" classes were included in the library, Visual Calendar worked fine under 6.0. The specific problems seemed to relate to custom PEMs added to the classes under 5.0, that coincidentally had the same name as PEMs added as "standard equipment" to the parent classes in 6.0. I gave the revised class library to Doug Blank. So, a fix is available for anyone who's interested.

>>Wesley,
>>
>>Did you get an answer to your post on 10/21?
>>
>>The syntax error you describe is turning out to be a frequent problem in translating VFP5 forms to VFP6. It is not cured by the recent service pack. There is a thread that discusses the problem briefly, there are several appraoches suggested. If you would like me to send it to you, I will be glad to.
>>
>>regards,