Ed

>>Absolutely; for day-to-day operations, I don't need detailed cpncious knowledge of the signalling mechanism or physiological mechanics of moving a finger. If I'm trying to design a system to emulate moving a finger, I'd better at least know the range of capabilities i have available to me. And what we do every day is design systems that model and emulate other activities, and we need to know how far we can push the envelope of our environment without designing a finger moving emulator that busts a nail every third time we use it.<<

If the goal is to turn on the light, the ability to so is competent in itself. Knowledge of "how" it happens is interesting but optional.

If, as you propose, the goal is to model movement of a finger, knowledge of the mechanics would help. But as I said, the modeller has no right to reprimand others with less interest in the mechanics.

The only "correct" reason to learn about Windows API etc for many VFP people is because of a desire to be "up with the play" and better able to respond to changes in the market. The irony is that those of us who respond to boots in the behind such as those delivered recently, and start to expand their knowledge, are usually not the ones who we really need to get at to learn and grow.

>>Actually, I have a copy of Gray's on the bookshelf...

Cool. I have an antique Grays- can't remember what volume, it is 20,000 miles away... Do you use your lumbricals when you turn on the light? < g >

Regards

JR