screw up?

[Paul (Pablo) Grim]

Thanks for the suggestions folks.

I think Michael Lee's solution is the way to go.  Simply renaming the items
on the record structure to have unique names.  This was what I should have
done in the first place (my "screw up") even though the different items will
always contain the same data...

> I think the preferred method would be to rename the items that occur more than
> once (COMPANY-NAME1, COMPANY-NAME2, etc.) if it's possible. If this is a
> smaller

The record structure looks like so (abbrev.)

W2-RECORD
-----------
W2-REC-TYPE
FED-TAX-NO
FILLER 
FILLER
COMPANY-NAME
FILLER
STATE
ZIP
FILLER
FILLER
COMPANY-NAME
STATE
ZIP

I was being lazy and simply used the same element names over again because
in our organization's case they will always contain the same data.

I was just poking around in the dictionary and hoping to find a way to enter
a record item "based on" another item.  Kind of an alias, which wouldn't
create a whole new element, but I don't see anything.

thanks



> From: "Blue" <bobedis@earthling.net>
> Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 07:56:29 -0500
> To: <powerh-l@lists.swau.edu>
> Subject: RE: screw up?
> 
> G'day Pablo
> 
> My question is this:  why do you need to put the same value in the record
> more than once?  You are talking about two different data stores here; one
> is the source data that is persistent and the other is output data that is
> transient.  You can store the item value in one column on the input side and
> use is multiple times on the output side.  This obviates the need to define
> the item more than once in a record.
> 
> Rather than focusing on the problem you describe I suggest to focus more on
> the data design and process flow.
> 
> Regards,
> Blue
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: powerh-l-admin@cube.swau.edu
>> [mailto:powerh-l-admin@cube.swau.edu]On Behalf Of Paul (Pablo) Grim
>> Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 8:53 PM
>> To: powerhouse
>> Subject: screw up?
>> 
>> 
>> Hi listers,
>> 
>> I recently defined a new record structure for electronic W2 reporting to
>> Social Security.
>> 
>> The record structure has 4 or 5 fields that are duplicated.  That is; the
>> same data goes on the record twice for each of these fields.  At least for
>> my organization.  Other orgs could report different data in these fields
>> which is why they are available.
>> 
>> So, when I defined the record, I entered the same item names more
>> than once.
>> I'm realizing this is probably grossly unnormalized data, but in a way it
>> makes sense because it really is the same data more than once on a given
>> record.
>> 
>> My question is how does Powerhouse deal with this in qtp?   eg:  if I have
>> an item COMPANY-NAME on the record twice and I want to do an ITEM
>> COMPANY-NAME INITIAL "ABC CORP" what will happen?  Will both fields get
>> assigned this value, or just the first one?  (seems to be the case in my
>> experiments).  It actually seems somewhat unpredictable depending on how I
>> code it.
>> 
>> thanks
>> 
>> p
>> 
>> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>> Mailing list: powerh-l@lists.swau.edu
>> Subscribe: "subscribe" in message body to powerh-l-request@lists.swau.edu
>> Unsubscribe: "unsubscribe" in message body to
>> powerh-l-request@lists.swau.edu
>> http://lists.swau.edu/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l
>> This list is closed, thus to post to the list you must be a subscriber.
>> 
> 
> 
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> Mailing list: powerh-l@lists.swau.edu
> Subscribe: "subscribe" in message body to powerh-l-request@lists.swau.edu
> Unsubscribe: "unsubscribe" in message body to powerh-l-request@lists.swau.edu
> http://lists.swau.edu/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l
> This list is closed, thus to post to the list you must be a subscriber.