>Actually, Image has no understanding or care about whether the data in a
>type "R" field is IEEE, MPE/V reals, or any other kind of information.
>It's just data (a bunch of bits) to Image.  [Query, on the other hand,
>has to format those reals and therefore needs to know the format.]
>
> [snip]
>
>The bottom line is:  The R4 and R8 fields have whatever you put into
them.
>Whether you can access either of those types from other environments is
>outside my expertise.
>
>Good luck!
>--
>Jeff Woods <[log in to unmask]> [PGP key available]
 
Mr. Woods,
        You are correct that to Image the field I call R2/R4 has no
material difference than the field E2/E4. They both take the same amount
of disc storage and that is what Image cares about is storing your data.
But I would disagree with you, it does matter if I have a field CHAR of 8
characters and stuffed it with binary data or a R4 and stuff it with
HP3000 real numbers or a field with E4 and stuff it with IEEE data.
        The gentleman did not have a problem storing the number, he had a
problem reading the number legibly. If you are in a habit of describing
your database as having one type of data yet storing another type of data,
then you are destined to write you own translator code instead of taking
advantage of the new automatic data translations available in the access
drivers available today. Setting the database to the correct type would
allow an access engine, i.e. ODBC, SQL, to inquire what was there and
attempt to map it to what it could handle.
        I thank you for you reminder that storage is cheap and that
storing information is easy. But it is the use, and interpretation of
stored data that gives it value. Keep your systems as honest as possible
and they will help you in the end.
James