Stunned !! Access does not provide this?

[Mike]

adLongVarChar to 'text' - Mapping ADO types to Native Access types?
Okay, so it's not the job of Access to map these types, but has
anybody, in the existance of this world ever figured out how to do so?

Does anyone have code that they can share that can correctly map
ADO/ADOX types to the native Access Types, correctly distinguishing
between say 'text' and 'memo'? Even if the routine needs more meta
data from say ADOX such as length, numeric precision and such I'll
take it. I'm stunned that in all the years Access has existed that
this capability does not exists.

Griffo

[Allen Browne]

JET (Interface)
DDL type[1]
DAO constant / value
ADOX constant / value

Text
TEXT (size)[2]
dbText
10
adVarWChar
202

Memo
MEMO
dbMemo
12
adLongVarWChar
203

Number: Byte
BYTE
dbByte
2
adUnsignedTinyI nt
17

Number: Integer
INTEGER
dbInteger
3
adSmallInt
2

Number: Long
LONG
dbLong
4
adInteger
3

Number: Single
SINGLE
dbSingle
6
adSingle
4

Number: Double
DOUBLE
dbDouble
7
adDouble
5

Number: Replica
GUID
dbGUID
15
adGUID
72

Number: Decimal
DECIMAL (precision, scale)[3]
dbDecimal
20
adNumeric
131

Date/Time
DATETIME
dbDate
8
adDate
7

Currency
CURRENCY
dbCurrency
5
adCurrency
6

Auto Number
COUNTER (seed, increment)[4]
dbLong with attributes
4
adInteger with attributes
3

Yes/No
YESNO
dbBoolean
1
adBoolean
11

OLE Object
LONGBINARY
dbLongBinary
11
adLongVarBinary
205

Hyperlink
[5]
dbMemo with attributes
12
adLongVarWChar with attributes
203

[6]
BINARY (size)
dbBinary
9
adVarBinary
204


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] There are numerous synonyms for these names, such as CHAR for the TEXT, DATE for DATETIME, SHORT for INTEGER, FLOAT for DOUBLE, LONGTEXT for MEMO, MONEY for CURRENCY. Some synonyms work in limited contexts, e.g. ADO only.

[2] Include the brackets if you specify a size (number of characters).

[3] Not available in the Access query interface or DAO. Use ADO to Execute the DDL query statement.

[4] The initial seed value and increment value are optional, and can be used only with ADO.

[5] The Hyperlink type field cannot be created with DDL.

[6] The fixed-width binary type field cannot be created with the user-interface.
--
Allen Browne - Microsoft MVP. Perth, Western Australia.
Tips for Access users - http://allenbrowne.com/tips.html
Reply to group, rather than allenbrowne at mvps dot org.

"Mike" <de**********@h otmail.com> wrote in message news:95******** *************** **@posting.goog le.com...

adLongVarChar to 'text' - Mapping ADO types to Native Access types?
Okay, so it's not the job of Access to map these types, but has
anybody, in the existance of this world ever figured out how to do so?

Does anyone have code that they can share that can correctly map
ADO/ADOX types to the native Access Types, correctly distinguishing
between say 'text' and 'memo'? Even if the routine needs more meta
data from say ADOX such as length, numeric precision and such I'll
take it. I'm stunned that in all the years Access has existed that
this capability does not exists.

Griffo

[David W. Fenton]

Al*********@See Sig.Invalid (Allen Browne) wrote in
<3f************ **********@free news.iinet.net. au>:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

JET (Interface)
DDL type[1]
DAO constant / value
ADOX constant / value

Allen, were you aware that your post was 1544 lines long, because
of incredibly verbose HTML appended at the end?

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

[TC]

"David W. Fenton" <dX********@bwa y.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:94******** *************** ****@24.168.128 .86...

Al*********@See Sig.Invalid (Allen Browne) wrote in
<3f************ **********@free news.iinet.net. au>:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

JET (Interface)
DDL type[1]
DAO constant / value
ADOX constant / value

Allen, were you aware that your post was 1544 lines long, because
of incredibly verbose HTML appended at the end?

My own objection to HTML is not the length, but the "executablility ". Who
knows >what< that rendering engine is doing behind the scenes...

But in this case it's hard to see how the data could have been given in any
other form.

TC

[SA]

David:

Are you aware how incredibly inane your comments sometimes are? But then I
suppose you hand code all your HTML related posts to reduce their size.

Steve Arbaugh
"David W. Fenton" <dX********@bwa y.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:94******** *************** ****@24.168.128 .86...

Al*********@See Sig.Invalid (Allen Browne) wrote in
<3f************ **********@free news.iinet.net. au>:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

JET (Interface)
DDL type[1]
DAO constant / value
ADOX constant / value

Allen, were you aware that your post was 1544 lines long, because
of incredibly verbose HTML appended at the end?

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

[David W. Fenton]

a@b.c.d (TC) wrote in <1068954674.809 488@teuthos>:

"David W. Fenton" <dX********@bwa y.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:94******* *************** *****@24.168.12 8.86...

Al*********@See Sig.Invalid (Allen Browne) wrote in
<3f************ **********@free news.iinet.net. au>:

>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> JET (Interface)
> DDL type[1]
> DAO constant / value
> ADOX constant / value

Allen, were you aware that your post was 1544 lines long,
because of incredibly verbose HTML appended at the end?

My own objection to HTML is not the length, but the
"executablilit y". Who knows >what< that rendering engine is doing
behind the scenes...

But in this case it's hard to see how the data could have been
given in any other form.

You've got to be kidding! I was able to read the data just fine in
the text version at the top.

And formats that don't work well in a Usenet post can be put
somewhere for download or on a web page.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

[David W. Fenton]

~f***********@n spm.com (SA) wrote in
<bp**********@n gspool-d02.news.aol.co m>:

"David W. Fenton" <dX********@bwa y.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:94******* *************** *****@24.168.12 8.86...

Al*********@See Sig.Invalid (Allen Browne) wrote in
<3f************ **********@free news.iinet.net. au>:

>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> JET (Interface)
> DDL type[1]
> DAO constant / value
> ADOX constant / value

Allen, were you aware that your post was 1544 lines long,
because of incredibly verbose HTML appended at the end?

Are you aware how incredibly inane your comments sometimes are?
But then I suppose you hand code all your HTML related posts to
reduce their size.

I've never made an HTML post in my life, because there is no
justification for posting HTML on Usenet.

The information Allen wanted to post could have been could have
been conveyed without requiring a 1544-line post.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

[SA]

>>The information Allen wanted to post could have been could have
been conveyed without requiring a 1544-line post.<<

My point (which you seemed to have missed) was BFD........why waste our
collective band width in commenting at all on Allen's post in the first
place?

I'm 99.9% sure Allen was aware that he was posting in HTML (DF: "Allen were
you aware?....") and that it would add overhead to the post. The table and
footnotes were nicely presented; worked great and communicated EXACTLY what
the original requester wanted, or is that not the point of this newsgroup?
Seems the original poster got the information he wanted too since he didn't
request a non-html version of the info be reposted.

There's no justification for posting HTML on Usenet.<<

Oh bullshit, you take this all too seriously; there's HTML everywhere these
days. So maybe it wasn't plain text, who gives a shit, cetainly not the guy
who wanted the info (oh forgot about him). HTML is the tool to use when you
need layout with text to effectively communicate information. An equally
effective layout would have been a pain in the arse to present well in the
line length limits of plain text format without wrapping.

So why do you deem it necessary to comment solely on the format of the help
Allen provided; for some polemical vision about the "purity" of Usenet? For
download speed? (74 kb on dial up may take a second or two but it is not
that big.) Give Allen and the rest of us a break.....

Your post clarified nothing, provided no new or additional information
useful to the original poster and didn't contribute at all to the thread;
hence my point about being inane.

Steve Arbaugh
Posting in Plain Text....
"David W. Fenton" <dX********@bwa y.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:94******** *************** ****@24.168.128 .90... ~f***********@n spm.com (SA) wrote in
<bp**********@n gspool-d02.news.aol.co m>:

"David W. Fenton" <dX********@bwa y.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:94******* *************** *****@24.168.12 8.86...

Al*********@See Sig.Invalid (Allen Browne) wrote in
<3f************ **********@free news.iinet.net. au>:

>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> JET (Interface)
> DDL type[1]
> DAO constant / value
> ADOX constant / value

Allen, were you aware that your post was 1544 lines long,
because of incredibly verbose HTML appended at the end?

Are you aware how incredibly inane your comments sometimes are?
But then I suppose you hand code all your HTML related posts to
reduce their size.

I've never made an HTML post in my life, because there is no
justification for posting HTML on Usenet.

The information Allen wanted to post could have been could have
been conveyed without requiring a 1544-line post.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

[David W. Fenton]

~f***********@n spm.com (SA) wrote in
<bp**********@n gspool-d02.news.aol.co m>:

The information Allen wanted to post could have been could have been conveyed without requiring a 1544-line post.<<

My point (which you seemed to have missed) was BFD........why
waste our collective band width in commenting at all on Allen's
post in the first place?

I'm 99.9% sure Allen was aware that he was posting in HTML (DF:
"Allen were you aware?....") and that it would add overhead to the
post. The table and footnotes were nicely presented;
No, they were raw HTML in my newsreader, which does not render
HTML, as any RFC-compliant newsreader will not.

HTML does not belong in Usenet posts, period.
. . . worked great
and communicated EXACTLY what the original requester wanted, or is
that not the point of this newsgroup? Seems the original poster
got the information he wanted too since he didn't request a
non-html version of the info be reposted.
What I saw was a text version followed by the HTML code for a
duplicate of precisely the same information.

This is one of the problems with HTML posting, duplication of
information. The other problems are that there are no accepted
standards for how to do it so the creators of newsreaders are just
guessing as to what to do with it.

There's no justification for posting HTML on Usenet.<<

Oh bullshit, you take this all too seriously; there's HTML
everywhere these days. . . .

I don't see it in this newsgroup, nor in any newsgroup I read.
. . . So maybe it wasn't plain text, who gives a
shit, cetainly not the guy who wanted the info (oh forgot about
him). HTML is the tool to use when you need layout with text to
effectively communicate information. . .
No, HTML is what you use when you're creating data to be rendered
by a browser.

That does not apply to Usenet.
. . . An equally effective layout
would have been a pain in the arse to present well in the line
length limits of plain text format without wrapping.
I was perfectly able to understand the text version of the post.
So why do you deem it necessary to comment solely on the format of
the help Allen provided; for some polemical vision about the
"purity" of Usenet? For download speed? (74 kb on dial up may take
a second or two but it is not that big.) Give Allen and the rest
of us a break.....
The HTML was entirely unnecessary and innapropriate. It was also
enormously huge, for no actual benefit.
Your post clarified nothing, provided no new or additional
information useful to the original poster and didn't contribute at
all to the thread; hence my point about being inane.

I asked Allen if he knew that he'd posted HTML. Allen has chosen
not to answer.

Get a clue, Steve: Microsoft did not invent the Internet and does
not control standards. Usenet existed long before Microsoft created
Outlook Express, and there are standards that are supposed to be
followed for Usenet postings. HTML is not part of those standards,
regardless of what Microsoft chooses to put in its poor newsreader.

Secondly, there was no actual benefit to the thousand or so lines
of HTML in that post. None. The information was there in the text
part, and perfectly understandable.

My assumption was that Allen had posted HTML by mistake and would
like to know about it. I probably should have emailed him
privately, yes. Had I done so, your totally unnecessary whining
about my post would have been avoided.

--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

[Allen Browne]

David, this post was intentionally HTML.

It was pasted from a Word document I wrote, and Word does create the most
horrendous HTML. However, if I had to take the time to re-write the thing, I
would not have answered the question.

I broke the rules for a reason: to give the table layout with footnotes, to
give a quick and (I had hoped) useful answer.

Further inforamtion for the original poster: You can get to most of that
information through the Object Browser: F2 in the code window.

--
Allen Browne - Microsoft MVP. Perth, Western Australia.
Tips for Access users - http://allenbrowne.com/tips.html
Reply to group, rather than allenbrowne at mvps dot org.

"David W. Fenton" <dX********@bwa y.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:94******** *************** ****@24.168.128 .74...
[snip]

My assumption was that Allen had posted HTML by mistake and would
like to know about it.