I must be missing something, but I have a report that when it is opened
programmatically as a Preview, there is a limited toolbar which
prevents the ability to edit the design, among other things. However,
if the use presses the <ESCAPEkey, it automatically reverts to Design
Mode.

How do I prevent this?

To be more specific, when I click on the "Preview" button on the
database window, pressing the <ESCAPEkey simply closes the form. But
when I use DoCmd.OpenReport with acPreview, the <ESCAPEkey dumps the
report into design mode.

vermutmb@gmail.com wrote:

I must be missing something, but I have a report that when it is opened
programmatically as a Preview, there is a limited toolbar which
prevents the ability to edit the design, among other things. However,
if the use presses the <ESCAPEkey, it automatically reverts to Design
Mode.
>
How do I prevent this?

This is the kind of thing that annoys me about someone following up
themselves, a post at 6pm and a followup at 8pm that includes
information that should have been included in the original post.

THINK BEFORE YOU POST THE FIRST TIME.

At 5:44pm, vermutmb@gmail.com wrote in
news:1155159877.076228.145940@m73g2000cwd.googlegr oups.com:

I must be missing something, but I have a report that when it is
opened programmatically as a Preview, there is a limited toolbar
which prevents the ability to edit the design, among other things.
However, if the use presses the <ESCAPEkey, it automatically
reverts to Design Mode.
>
How do I prevent this?

And then at 8:13pm, vermutmb@gmail.com wrote in
news:1155168825.616819.65770@p79g2000cwp.googlegro ups.com:

To be more specific, when I click on the "Preview" button on the
database window, pressing the <ESCAPEkey simply closes the form.
But when I use DoCmd.OpenReport with acPreview, the <ESCAPEkey
dumps the report into design mode.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

David,

While I can appreciate your desire for an orderly world, I actually
feel that I included enough information in the first post, but,
concerned that there would be no response to my query, based on past
experience, decided to add a reply to push it up the stack.

Rather than simply write "Anyone?," I decided to rephrase the original
question with more specific language. However, were you to parse
through both, you would find that they say the same thing. And anyone
who is capable of answering it would likely realize that.

Thank you though for the opportunity to push this back up through the
stack. Perhaps someone might be able to respond with a resolution to
my issue (for which I searched mightily throughout these groups and the
web in general), as opposed to posting a declaration of a pet peeve.

regards,
marc

David W. Fenton wrote:

This is the kind of thing that annoys me about someone following up
themselves, a post at 6pm and a followup at 8pm that includes
information that should have been included in the original post.
>
THINK BEFORE YOU POST THE FIRST TIME.
>
At 5:44pm, vermutmb@gmail.com wrote in
news:1155159877.076228.145940@m73g2000cwd.googlegr oups.com:
>

>
And then at 8:13pm, vermutmb@gmail.com wrote in
news:1155168825.616819.65770@p79g2000cwp.googlegro ups.com:
>

>
>
--
David W. Fenton http://www.dfenton.com/
usenet at dfenton dot com http://www.dfenton.com/DFA/

I was taught never to scold someone who asks a favour, especially if you don't do it for them.

On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 20:37:03 -0500, "David W. Fenton" <XXXusenet@dfenton.com.invalidwrote:

>This is the kind of thing that annoys me about someone following up
>themselves, a post at 6pm and a followup at 8pm that includes
>information that should have been included in the original post.
>
>THINK BEFORE YOU POST THE FIRST TIME.
>
>At 5:44pm, vermutmb@gmail.com wrote in
>news:1155159877.076228.145940@m73g2000cwd.googleg roups.com:
>

>
>And then at 8:13pm, vermutmb@gmail.com wrote in
>news:1155168825.616819.65770@p79g2000cwp.googlegr oups.com:
>