You can fill it in, and you can print it out like that, but you can't actually save the data. IIRC.

I know from recent experience this is 100% true.

Can this relational database be saved?

I'm working on a Access database to be used behind a website for my digital libraries class. It's on a China collection. Each catalogue item has one or more pieces. (eg A teapot has a lit and the pot itself, or serving dish with lid.) There can also be one or more photos per catalogue item, but the multiple photos do not correspond in any way to the multiple pieces.

So we have the main catalogue record table linked to the piece table via the catalogue number. And it is also linked to the photo table via the same field.

When we try to run a query displaying the information from all three tables, we get a record in the query for each of the possible combinations of photo and piece there are. All we need is one bigass record displaying all of the relevant info. Is this possible? I just cannot get my brain around how to make this work.

All we need is one record displaying all of the relevant info.

What is the "relevant info" in this case?

eta: Also, did the photo stuff I sent you work?

Yeah, it did. Thanks. When I first inserted the photos they did not show. After I closed and reopened they were there. Sometimes I think Access is just playing with me.

Edited because my project partner's husband just figured out how to fix this.

Okay, it's fixed, but from what you said, it sounds like all you needed to do was set a condition in the catalogue number field equal to the item you want to look at.

Thanks DX. I'm going to try that on the copy I'm playing with, just so I figure out how to do it myself.

Can this relational database be saved?

I wonder if there is anywhere to discuss subjects like this on Buffistas? It occurs to me more and more frequently that the main concept in relational DB's is old and busted. Everywhere I go I read about people hassling with table joins, or I see people who are all proud in the chest about whipping the data model into revealing a reality. Feh. Objects have parts.

Anyway. Sue, your query is unconstrained. It needs an 'and', whereby catalogue numbers can be excluded, as DX said. Ask yourself "What is a legitimate set?" Perhaps a table that describes a legit set will help … Teapot has a (Teapot Lid and Teapot Pot) and. Serving Dish has (Serving Dish Lid and Serving Dish).

Sue, if I understand what you're trying to do, you'd need a form with two separate subforms (or a report with two subreports). The form would be catalog items, and the subforms would be pieces and photos.

Doing this is an Access thing rather than an SQL thing....

Sue, if I understand what you're trying to do, you'd need a form with two separate subforms (or a report with two subreports). The form would be catalog items, and the subforms would be pieces and photos.

Oh, I have the form. The form works swimmingly. I need to have this all in a query. So we can run it on a website.

Anyway Supposedly it is fixed on the other end, but I'm still going to play with it. I feel that I'm at the point with db's where I have to learn a little programming to make it do anything more.

there are intermediate levels of the product, one of which does allow you to save fill-in form data, but doesn't allow you to alter the form.

Do you know what the intermediate level would be? I'm curious because the Adobe Reader help file certainly makes it sound like you can export and save data from a form using Reader, if the form has been set up for it:

If the author of the Adobe PDF document enabled the Fill in Form features, you can export the form data to a separate file. Exporting form data lets you save the existing data, which you can then send via email or the Internet. You can save the form data as a tab-separated text file, Forms Data Format (FDF), or in XFDF (XML-based FDF files).

Note: You cannot export or import data in Adobe Reader unless the Adobe PDF file has special usage rights assigned.

on edit: Please to forgive the excessive posting. Next time I'll wait to see if posting worked before hitting the sticky mouse button a million times.