"Roger Carlson" wrote

I know there are customers who believe they "need"
sequential numbering for some reason, but I always
try to dissuade them. Sometimes it works
sometimes it doesn't, but I try.

Long ago, but not so very far away, in the days of Access 2.0, I was doing
some work for a client on the prototype of an application that presumably
was going to be developed further to cover the workflow in their entire
production process. The "little old* lady accountant" who was one of the
ones who had to approve just about had a fit of apoplexy when she saw
missing numbers and it was explained why.

* not as old then as I am now, I suspect, but a real,
old-time, green eyeshade and sleeve-garters
bookkeeper type person

That's not one of those cases where you want to have a logical discussion to
prove the client's approver wrong. It was simple to correct... slight logic
change, DMAX out of the bag of tricks, and everybody was happy. Except, in
the longer term, the contract broker for whom I was working when they found
out they weren't "in with" the IT manager as they had thought.

He just up and took another job somewhere else, didn't even bother to call
the sales person for the contract broker, and he'd been the executive
sponsor of this particular application. The new IT manager decided to move
everything from client-server to IBM AS-400.

Bye, bye, development contract.

Larry Linson
Microsoft Office Access MVP