""Geoff Worboys"" <geoff@...> wrote in message
news:009b01c127e6$ca039bc0$0201950a@hex...

> > The hole idea was to use the key field only
> > for "is required" and always display
> > the display field's name.
>
> Reviewing the code once again I think the problem has been that I
> reused a function that was setup for use on TIB_Grid (matching the
> DisplayField of the lookup with the description field in the main
> dataset). It seemed to make sense at the time, and produced results
> consistent with the other control labels, but in retrospect it may not
> be very intuitive.
>
> What we have now is a situation where the lookupcombo AutoLabel has
> been working a particular way for quite a long time. I am concerned
> that if I change it to match your request that I will break other
> peoples existing applications.
>
> For example; People may have already setup FieldsDisplayLabel values
> on the main dataset for the foreign key or descriptive fields. If I
> alter the lookupcombo as you propose then such properties will be
> ignored and existing apps will lose their labels.
>
> I am happy to make the change required if everyone thinks it will be
> ok. (Or do we make the change and see how many complain?)

No ! don't change it.

It works now consistently (it didn't in ibo42ea) and i hate changing
something that works perfectly.
Usualy it is dificult to get there (perfection i mean), i know i never did.

Regards,
Pirtea Calin.

SoftScape - Software Development
pcalin@...