TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2002-02 > 1013111261


From: Donald J Schulteis <>
Subject: [TMG] Re: Residence v. Address - Cautionary Note
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 13:47:41 -0600


-----Original Message-----
>>Hi, Paul:

>>What version of TMG? What version of Access? (Yes, I
>>understand that this is like opening up the case to
>>your hard drive ...)

>>Darrell
>>


Paul replied:
> To answer your question, I believe it was about 2.0 on both. It
> sounds like John Cardinal's utility will allow the reassignment of
> a specific tag to a different tag GROUP, and that would be the
> best way to do it now. Rather than dump Address tags, as
> someone else has suggested, I would recommend moving
> Residence tags to the ADDRESS group to allow access to the
> Zipcode and Phone Number fields. When an Address tag is
> changed to a Residence tag within the ADDRESS group, those
> fields are preserved. I would hate to lose old phone numbers,
> as they could be a clue to someone's identity or the solution to
>some other mystery! <g>

I don't believe John's utility allows you to change a tag name from one
group to another but I sure could be wrong about this.

When I used John's program to change my address tags to residence tags I
did not lose zip code. The zip code was placed in the state field. I had
my own telephone tag so I did not use that field. Some may say hey "you
are adulterating the State field" but I don't see that. Many a report I
don't output county but do state and having the zip code there helps to
differentiate locations such as Germantown in Washington County from
Germantown in Juneau County, Wisconsin. And it is just as easy to focus
on 'contains' as 'equals'. I see it as a benefit. I can also use my
residence tags for address labels if I wish.

But, if I had my druthers I believe I would rather have a zip code field
but in the Residence Tag. In my case I made a tradeoff. I wish though
that I had not been required to do so.

A cautionary note. With TMG5 reportedly to be available in the near
term, it would seem foolish to make structural changes to your database
at this time. Rather it would seem prudent to wait for TMG5 and see what
it has to offer. What may be a problem under TMG4 may not be under TMG5.

Donald Schulteis

This thread: