You want a lookup (looked up value)
In your case you would relate T2::cos_01 to T1::NO in order to have a relationship. Then set T2::img_01 to be a looked up value from T1::PIC
BTW, your naming convention is a bit confusing, and also, the existance of repeating field values (img_01 - 06, cos_01-06) indicates that your data structure is not normalized. It may be valid in your use case though, I'm just forewarning you that you could run into issues later as that table balloons into hundreds of fields.
For that you should have a Script Trigger to change your data and then have a simple Relationship between your Fields
T_1::NO and T_2::cos_01
2 of 2 people found this helpful
Just in case you don't about this feature ...
once you have your relationship established between cos_01 and NO, you can place the PIC field on the layout for table T_2. Every time you change cos_01, the related corresponding PIC will show.
Thank you all for the prompt reply,,, I will give it a try and let you know the results..
just to add a bit more ...
when you add the PIC field to your layout, in the Specify Field dialog box, you'll need to look near the top and select the relationship you created before the PIC field will be visible.
I still am struggling with this, as the relationship is only with the first field....
I have simplified the database and only added 10 pictures rather than 200, could someone please look at and let me know what I am doing wrong.
Truly appreciate your support, and sorry if this seems like something very obvious.
Test Database.fmp12.zip 527.9 K
I haven't looked at the file yet, but if you can duplicate what you did for the first field ... new relationships cos_02->NO and cos_03->NO.
The other table T_2 has 6 fields (cos_01, cos_02 and cos_03) all number fields, it also has three container fields (img_01, img_02 and img_03)… But this table has ONLY ONE RECORD."
This is a classic case of a design error: un-normalized design.
Every time you see a file with someField_01, someField_02, etc, it almost always means the structure is wrong.
You're asking us to spend effort fixing something you shouldn't be doing in the first place.
It will be better to fix your design.
Test DatabaseMOD.fmp12.zip 628.0 K
Thank you for taking the time out to redesign the database, and helping me understand the correct structure.