I have tried a number of variations on this theme and so far have had no joy.

It's a FMP.5 dbase of 14K records any thoughts really appreciated as my brain is tarting to melt and I don't think I can see the forest for trees anymore.

Below is a conditional calculation statement which is working, partially.

It is supposed to return one of the following results - "50", "60", "70", "80",

"90" or "1" from a FMP.5 database of some 14,000+ records. currentlly I am able

to get "90"s, "50"s & "60"s out of it and however the results are not correctly

divided inspite of the numbers totalling the number of records. With the

eception of the "90" which are accurate the other 2 results are inconsistent

within their divisions and across the divisions.

For explanations:

"medium code" = a range from "1" through to "28"

"check/...."'s = reference fields which are true if the item has been sighted

"1" is the result that tells me that there is no need to check that record(s) as

all is correct

"50"..."90" would allow me to generate clusters of records for verification -

the point of this whole exercise as this dbase has evolved rather than been

developed I'm trying to clean it up.....

If(

MediumCode = "27"

and CheckDrawSighted <> "True" , "90" ,

If( (MediumCode = "07" or "10" or "11" or "12" or "23" or "28")

and CheckTransSighted <> "True" , "50" ,

If( (MediumCode = "02" or "05" or "06" or "08" or "14" or "15" or "17" or "19" or "24")

and CheckNegSighted <> "True" , "60" ,

If( (MediumCode= "04" or "09" or "13" or "16" or "18" or "20" or "25")

and CheckProofSighted <> "True" , "70" ,

If( (MediumCode = "03" or "21" or "22" or "26")

and CheckPrintSighted <> "True" , "80" , "1" )

)

)

)

)

I dont' begin to understand what you are trying to do, but I think I see one problem. In a logical statement (A = 5 or 6) is always true regardless of the value of A. The correct statement is (A = 5 or A = 6). It is also easier to use a Case statement instead of nested If's. - bd

Cheers Liveoak,

I got lost in the conditions and lost sight of the statement.

I posted this query on the FileMaker discussion board as well and that sorted me out.

Thanks for the thought anyway.

What was trying to be done was extract some broad groupings across a db which has grown in a bit a higgardly piggarly sort of way over the years. Until I got hold of it there wasn't even a unique reference to any record.