Erik,

>>I can't see any reason why it should return 0 instead of the actual relativerow when the grid doesn't have the focus.
>
>First of all, I agree with your wish t obe able to tell what row on the grid would be active if it had focus.
>But I think you misunderstood the point of the property. When the grid doesn't have focus there is no active row. That's what active row means: which cell has focus. So of course it doesn't have one when the grid doesn't even have focus.

I guess that's how MS sees it too. But I do find that a grid has an activerow even if the focus has lost.

>I doubt that this will ever be changed, for backwards compatibility reasons. It would be nice though, if we had another property that told us under which row the current record lies, that would be accessible all of the time.

Yep, I agree, though the distinction between the activerow and relativerow and this new property gets really confusing.

Walter,