I finally got it working. Turns out the name of the field ("desc") was apparently a keyword in ODBC and that's what was causing the problem. At least that's our best guess becuase once I changed the name of the field everything worked fine.

Thanks anyway for the help!! See ya next week

>Denise ----
>
>If this stumping continues, bring the Access MDB and your VFP DBC to the TFUG meeting next Wednesday and I'll take it back and play with it, OK?
>
>>
>>That'll probably help me a lot when it comes time to get the field back up to full size. But for now I've shortened the "naughty" field to 50 char both in the access table and in my view. I've compared the "naughty" field to the "nice" one (I feel like some kind of Santa Claus) in both the access table and in the view. In each the "naughty" one and the "nice" one seem exactly the same (except for the field lenght -- the naughty one is 50 char and the nice one is 80).
>>
>>So if they're exactly the same why aren't they working the same?
>>
>>Now, when I first noticed that the naugty one came over as a memo, I shortened it, deleted the view and recreated it so I should be working with a fresh thing here. When that didn't work I deleted the field in Access and reinserted it.
>>
>>I am so stumped!!!!
>>
>>>Hi again Denise ---
>>>
>>>If the field is 255 character, go ahead and use DBSETPROP() and change the type on the VFP side to Char and 254. See if that helps.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>It's probably not that becuase the save button is on the form. However, it's not on the page but that doesn't seem to matter becuase the other edit box is on the same page and it works fine.
>>>>
>>>>What I did find out through going to the command window and trying to do a replace manually is that the replace works fine in my view but when I go to close the table I get an ODBC error talking about a syntax error in the update command in Access.
>>>>
>>>>I also noticed while investigating that because the field was 255 char in Access, the view I created in FP seemed to see it as a memo field. So I figured that might be a problem. So I shortened the field to 25 char (the other one, the one that's working right, is 80 char). But I'm still getting the same error.
>>>>