I can't myself quite understand the macro item 1 (or why it's there):
1 :
SetValue :
Item - [visible]
Expression - Yes
This appears to set the property of "some object" to Visible. That is (or was)
unquestionably it's purpose.
The "macro item 2" just opens a report. I can't imagine why it would need any
"macro pre-processing".
Things I would think of are:
-if it works in A97, are you sure it reads the same there? A97 (in particular)
can suffer from subtle corruptions and therefore may not convert well (unless
"cleaned-up" before conversion).
-What is that line for? Don't ask us, you've taken over maintenance of the
program, and are the only one who has the full program. What happens if you
remove it (in A97?). You will surely soon discover if it was necessary or not!
-Most "legacy programs" ie taken over from someone else, have some level of
claptrap and aborted ideas left in them? (Well, mine do)
-Visible is a property of many objects to make them visible or not. It is not
a word the programmer should use otherwise (being a reserved word with a clear
meaning). For all I know, it could be intended to make SOMETHING invisible in
the "calling menu or system" rather than the called report. It is unlikely to
refer to a report yet to be opened.
-It is unlikely a "Visible" property would prevent things from working (if you
just take it out). The error message says the object it refers to is no longer
available, which I would tend to believe. As to what object, how would we
know, in YOUR database? I tend to think the error message means what it says
(for once!)
You're really not asking an Access question. You're asking how your database
was designed. If you don't know then we sure don't!
(I have covered why things may work in A97 and not in a conversion, at least,
one of the common reasons)
If your code is anything like your spelling (sytanxes), then best take a deep
breath! And start "debugging" step-by-step as any normal programmer would do.
It is NOT a known Access problem, apparently. I would expect, on any
conversion, to have to do some extensive testing. Who knows what bugs may lurk
there? eg, SP-What?
Chris