Steve Martino

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Steve Martino last won the day on July 22 2016

Steve Martino had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

10 Good

About Steve Martino

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Broomall, PA

Contact Methods

  • Yahoo

FIleMaker Profile

  • FM Application
    12 Advanced
  • Platform
    Windows 7
  • Skill Level

Recent Profile Visitors

3,540 profile views
  1. Is this on the right track? CheckInOut.fmp12
  2. Exactly how are you duplicating them? I can only assume when you create the records you are doing them thru the portal and the relationship is setting the proper key fields, and when you duplicate them, one of the key fields is not being set. Maybe you can diagnose this by putting all key fields either in the portal or on the proper layout. Then when you duplicate, see if those fields are properly populated.
  3. Thanks (again) Comment, works perfectly
  4. Hi forum, I know I saw this before, but I can't really figure out how to properly search for it. What I have is a report. In the header are 6 categories in a checkbox set, based on the Value list 'Categories', and it's a global field (gSearch). When checking boxes, the OnObjectModify script trigger takes the value(s) searches and sorts the sub-summary part. The sort on Category is based on the value list (not alphabetically). So it the sort is in the order of the checkboxes you see in the screen shot. All of this works fine. What I was trying to accomplish was to put a merge field (gSearchParameters) in the header that states what boxes were checked (to be used when printed). I did this with a global field, auto enter calculation: Substitute(List(gSearch); "¶"; " | ") This also works, but as you can see, and as expected, it puts them in the order they were checked, not the order of the checkboxes. So, the obvious question is can I put the merge field in the order the checkboxes are shown, not as each box was selected? Any help is always appreciated. Thanks Steve.
  5. You could use an OnRecordLoad script trigger
  6. Whether the option is Preview or Publish, build the report and go to preview mode, pause the script. After the user clicks continue pop up a custom dialog with the choices. Whatever the user clicks will be the branch the script takes
  7. You can do it a few ways. One way is to do it in Word, copy/paste into a Filemaker field, and/or save the doc as a container (pdf). The other is to make a few layouts that are templates. Using the 'slide up' feature you can make them as long or as short as you want. I do this with customers where I made a table to send letters/emails/texts. After I build the body of the text, select the appropriate template, print/email letter, save a copy of the letter as PDF in a container. Mine is kinda clunky, as I am rebuilding in 15 (from 12) and plan to polish this part of the db with popovers and sliders. But their is an example of this floating around. If I find it I'll edit my post. Edit: This may help:
  8. You can simply put a button on the portal row, set the button to go to related record.
  9. Case( isempty (Table::Map); Table::Price;Table::Map-Table::Price )
  10. It would be easier for me to fix the script with a sample file, but I see a few problems. First may be structure. I wonder about Progress notes and Add on Progress notes being in separate tables. But that aside a few questions. If a Client has Progress notes, can I assume AON (add on notes) is set to 1 when there are add on notes in a related table? If so, how is it set, and do you even need to set this flag field. Also what happens after you print all of these records. Are you omitting them or marking them in a way that prevents them from reprinting when the client has more Progress Notes? I see you flipping back and forth between layouts when it may not be necessary. Are you only printing one client at a time? A simpler way may be to forget the flag field and check for related records in the Add on notes table. From the start I would first check for related records in an If statement, then set the client ID, then go to related records. This way if there are no related records, you don't enter the loop. Sort records instead of Sort Records by Field Then I would enter the loop and Print (save to PDF) the first Note. Then I would check for related records with an IF statement for Add on Progress Notes. If Add on Notes, you enter the inner loop and you go to related records, new window, to the proper layout, and print (append) each on of those, then close window. If No add on notes, you continue on outer loop, to next Notes related record.
  11. I think you want your layout based on weeks, sorted by week name. Then add fields for projects and customer. Much like an Invoice solutions where you base your reports on line items, and have fields usually merge fields for customer. Your boiler plate contract could be in a table or global table of contracts that you could lookup (or by calculation), much like when you look up and add a line item to the invoice. Then you can take the boilerplate, modify it, and save it into a container in your projects table, where you would keep contracts-change orders, additional work, etc. It's quite an involved database.
  12. Is this what you are looking for? Little confused about your description. If it's not, maybe mock up one on Excel. PrototypeModSM.fmp12
  13. I don't fully understand what you are doing, but it seems you are set up incorrectly. I think you should be more set up like an invoicing solutions where Receipt table equals a join table between Inventory and Student. Receipt represents 'line items', and adding inventory is like adding line items, by lookup or calculation. This could simply be a portal on the Students table. Then reporting would be easier.
  14. That's the usual reason. It helps me sometimes in layout mode to zoom in and select all to find those little outlined cast away parts.
  15. When you say it's not working, are you sorting on whatever field the second sub summary part is based on? So with 2 sub summary parts, your report would need to be sorted by both. The other thing to try, is instead of the second sub summary part, did you try a trailing grand summary part and put the field into that part?