Nancy,

I didn't mean to imply that single instance always equals modal, only that sometimes a modal form would be appropriate.

What's the use case though for having lots of places that can launch a single instance form? Does it not mean that each form would have a different data context and therefore not really be single instance at all?

Modality annoys the heck (you may substitute a more intense expletive here if you like *g*) out of me, there's a dozen places in VFP itself where it goes modal when it darn well shouldn't and I've griped to the powers that be about it.

Some things are client dependent too, there are a whole class of users out there that are on the every form is modal end of the spectrum. *bg*

>While I used to agree with this, now I have to respectfully disagree. Modal <> single instance, really, IMO. Modal forms should be limited to situations where the application needs--really needs--the user to do something before continuing with anything else. As with a Quick Add that gets the minimum information for a customer while ringing up a purchase. Since it's a bummer that certain things don't function while a modal form is open (say, the edit menu) and since it's by it's nature obstructive, they really shouldn't be used often. One of the few things I truly liked about what Alan Cooper has to say, as a matter fact.
>
>Single instance just means that a form doesn't logically need to be open more than once, or in environments when having more than one copy of the form open is confusing to users. In that case, it's much better to activate the copy they have open. It seems like it would be fairly easy to open the second copy if the first one is already the active form. In that case, the user, reasonably might really mean for it.
>
>Meant to add to this that it does make sense freqently to offer access to forms in multiple places.