Hugh,

I'm not knocking VFP; I use it myself. One of the advantages of the DBF is it is a well-known format. For example, my understanding is that people attempt to extend the functionality of SBT Accounting by accessing the data tables. You are are referring to that as unauthorized "hacking", others see that as flexibility.

Now, if the backend is SQL Server, you can still get to the data via other means, and even extend the functionality. But the server will refuse data that breaks referential integrity.

The question was simple: Is VFP a true RDBMS? You supplied some definitions. I'm simply saying that it does not hold strictly to the definition you supplied.

And my previous two sentences were sincere, and were not a jab at you. When I said, "I don't know if you would be correct," I meant it. I did not say, "You would not be correct."

>
>Wait just a minute here! In applications I write I'll decide what means and tools are legitimate, thank you!
>
>As I recall, VFP is a database plus application programming language. When I sell an application to an end-user I decide what functionality they will have (not them or MS). If they use unauthorized tools (even if they are from MS) to manipulate the data in a manner that is outside the interface designed by me they're hacking the data (as far as I'm concerned).
>
>>You can call your system an RDBMS if you want to. I don't know if you would be correct :)
>
>
>Are you saying VFP should be dumb-downed in order to be a "real" RDBMS? If so, I'd prefer to call what VFP offers as an RDBMSx system.
>
>VFP has everything you can get from an RDBMS and more!!!
>
>Hugh