>Craig..
>
>I totally agree.
>
>However...
>
>The question was asked, and you provided and answer. That brings it into issue. I would have redirected the question to a public forum where it could be addressed in detail.
>
>FWIW, the answer of using a hierarchical recordset is NOT the way to go. This is what you told the person to consider. Grabbing individual recordsets IS the way to go. Still, you have a whole series of management issues to address. This is what your component needs to deal with.
>
>You have a person now who may be trying to employ what you told them to do. No doubt, they will run into issues.
>
>There is no dishonor in this word by saying either "I don't know" or " I cannot address that issue now." The worst thing you can do is give a partial answer. Even worse is giving a partially wrong answer. I suppose the upside is that the person can then only implement part of a bad solution.
>
>Yes, I DID remember that it was an introduction. I think YOU forgot that point.
>
>Craig, if you make the step of presenting in public, you have to accept both the good and the not-so-good.

I've been doing training since 1985. I can handle the good and bad. In fact, I welcome the critiques. That's how we improve our skills.

>For example, I received some critical comments for not having more formal samples prepared. A legit. comment. I did not rip anybody's head off for those comments. I explained why I did not have more formalized samples. Still, that does not invalidate those comments.
>
>I am afraid the waters are so polluted here that the spirit and the point of this is lost. And I suppose I have to hold myself accountable for that. However, I will also hold others accountable just the same.
>
>< JVP >
>
>