Ah, ok. Point taken.

Alan

>You said "They'll both be able to read the table". That's why I said "maybe".
>
>
>>I know it had a different indexing scheme, but I'm not sure it really matters in a situation like this. I'm assuming the 'common table(s)' is/are not actually already existing in either application, but are just used to move information from one to the other.
>>
>>In other words, fox puts out a bunch of info into a common info exchange table, and clipper picks it up. And vice-versa.
>>
>>I don't see why it shouldn't work. The only really interesting part of it would be how to decide when the data gets exchanged. On a timer maybe?
>>
>>Alan
>>
>>>Maybe. Clipper supported tables with more than 254 fields. It also used a different indexing scheme.
>>>
>>>>If, by 'talk to' you mean just passing data, you can always use a clipper table to move data back and forth. They'll both be able to read the table, so it should work ok.
>>>>
>>>>Alan
>>>>