Dave,

I think you're right that your unique codeno method would work a lot better than my current "logic".

When generating new id numbers, do you just use the next available number, i.e. if you have codeno's from 00001-00686 would you just make the next codeno 00687 regardless of the codetype? Then would my codetype be solely used for filtering a group of codes for a particular dropdown list (i.e. just my printer list)?

Thanks!
Mandy

>i usually use only one unique id number table for all my lookup tables (every code has its own distinct number and may or may not be sequential). i think you'd need to store the codetype AND codeno the way you're numbering them now. if (for your example) positions were 1 - 3, printers 4 - 6, etc. you wouldn't need to know the codetype when looking up this info...
>
>>Barbara,
>>
>>Boy have I been falling a lot lately ;)! (it's tough teaching yourself to ride that bike without training wheels or a parent to hold you til you're steady!)
>>
>>After reading your message I've got a question. Maybe my Allcodes table isn't set up correctly. Again the structure is:
>> codetype - c12
>> codeno - c5
>> dispvalue - c80
>>And the contents are unique by a combination of the codetype *and* the codeno. That is there are dupes in the codeno. Here (I love showing examples):
>> Codetype Codeno Dispvalue
>> position 00001 CIO
>> position 00002 DB Manager
>> position 00003 Telecom Specialist
>> printer 00001 Laserjet
>> printer 00002 Inkjet
>> printer 00003 Dot Matrix
>> software 00001 Word Perfect
>> and so on......
>>
>>Should the codeno's all be unique so I can relate them by themselves with my data tables or is there a way to relate them with a combo-key (codetype+codeno) ... although the data tables only contain the codeno... *I* have to know which codetype it refers to and was thinking I could include the specific codetype in my filters. I'm beginning to think this isn't ideal. Your thoughts???
>>
>>Thanks as always,
>>Mandy
>>
>>