• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


CobaltSky last won the day on September 1 2011

CobaltSky had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

9 Neutral

1 Follower

About CobaltSky

  • Rank
    FileMaker Developer

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Melbourne, Australia

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

FIleMaker Profile

  • Profile Updated
  • FM Application
    13 Advanced
  • Platform
    Cross Platform
  • Skill Level
    Authorized Trainer
  • Certification
  • Membership
    FileMaker Business Alliance
    FIleMaker Platinum Member

Recent Profile Visitors

2,859 profile views
  1. Hi Folks, In a new development for FileMaker users in the Asia-Pacific region, NightWing Enterprises is now offering 3-day courses for all levels of FileMaker users (four separate levels). To begin with, we've scheduled classes at the first two levels, introductory and intermediate, in both Sydney and Melbourne in April and May 2017. The events coming up are: • Introduction to the FileMaker Platform (Beginner) 3 days - Sydney, AU - 26-28 Apr 2017 - AUD $1,650.00 (including GST)• The Power of FileMaker (Intermediate) 3 days - Sydney, AU - 1-3 May 2017 - AUD $1,650.00 (including GST)• Introduction to the FileMaker Platform (Beginner) 3 days - Melbourne, AU - 17-19 May 2017 - AUD $1,650.00 (including GST)• The Power of FileMaker (Intermediate) 3 days - Melbourne, AU - 22-24 May 2017 - AUD $1,650.00 (including GST) Additional details including topics and content to be covered at each level can be found on our web site at: Places are limited and will be allocated on a first-come-first served basis. Registration for the above events is now open at: If you know anyone who would benefit from three days of action packed training at introductory or intermediate levels (or both), and who is able to get themselves to either Sydney or Melbourne for the sessions listed above, please draw this message to their attention! : ) Regards, Ray
  2. NightWing Enterprises is pleased to announce two new products for managing booking (in whole-day periods) or scheduling (in quarter-hour increments) of assets such as rooms, venues, equipment, people, vehicles etc. These two new systems are similar in design and concept but adapted for different applications. Both products can be used in FileMaker 13 or later, and both are optimised for FileMaker 14. The products can be used stand-alone, or hosted on FileMaker Server, and can be accessed by FileMaker Pro, FileMaker Go or FileMaker WebDirect. In addition to supporting the placing and management of bookings, both products include a Gantt-style display of bookings for a user-selected period, and support drag-and-drop editing of bookings in place on the chart in FileMaker Pro. Bookings can also be edited on the chart screen in FileMaker Pro by double-clicking on them, or in FileMaker Go and FileMaker WebDirect by tapping/clicking on them to invoke an editor pane. Walk-though videos showing both products are available on our web site. Demos of each product can be downloaded free, and the products can be licensed from us starting from $140 for a single seat license. Developer licensing is also available for those wishing to modify the systems or incorporate some or all of the functionality into an existing solution. Full details are available from the product pages on our web site at: including demo downloads, documentation, screenshots, pricing/purchase links and videos outlining the basic operations of each system. Regards, Ray ------------------------------------------------ R J Cologon, Ph.D. Director of Development NightWing Enterprises, Melbourne, Australia Email: ------------------------------------------------
  3. For those interested, I understand that there are a few additional places available for the East USA class (Norwalk, CT) so if you'd like to join us, the registration page is at: Also, registrations are now open for the Sydney (AU) class, and can be made at: Regards, Ray
  4. As noted above, registration for the Master Classes in California, Germany, the UK and Connecticut was set to close later today. Good news is that it's been agreed to extend the registration deadline by a further week, to 2 March, after which decisions will be made about the viability of each of the first four classes in the series. So, if these events are of interest to you, you have a further week from today to 'make it happen'. Meanwhile, I'm told that a group discount rate is a possibility at the hotel in Norwalk, assuming most attendees want to stay in the Courtyard Marriott hotel where the class will take place. I don't have all the details as yet, but will post them once they're confirmed. Regards, Ray
  5. Hi 3guk, To achieve this, you'll need to enable the user to specify the filtername in the item record in order to then present them a list of the corresponding values from the Category table. So you'll need a filtername field in the Item table (you might consider making it a global field, assuming you don't need the value to persist in each record), and then a relationship (using the equijoin "=" relationship operator) from Item to a Table Occurrence of Category that matches the filtername fields in both tables. With this set up, you'll then be able to set the value list to use values from the Category table occurrence (the one related Item::filtername=Category::filtername, choosing the option to display only related values, and specifying the "starting from" context as the Item table. Regards, Ray
  6. A quick heads up for those who may not yet have caught up with the latest on this demo series... The thirteenth demo completes the set and is available on our demos page at: This new demo shows a way of working with relational data - analogous to a "portal within a portal" - involving cascading portals where selecting a row in one portal invokes the display of related records (i.e. related to the record that's active in the first portal). And selecting a row among the 'child' rows in the second portal invokes the display of 'grandchild' records in a third portal. It's a sequel to a cascading portal demo that some might remember me posting on this site many moons ago... In this case, the demo shows only three portals interacting, but the technique can be extended to as many levels (on a single layout) as you wish. Also featured in the new demo is a FileMaker 13 technique using conditionally hidden attributes to enhance the user experience of adding records to a portal. In each portal, you can add, edit or delete records within the cascading hierarchy (preserving relational links as you do) - all from a single layout. Also, as an aside, if you've found our demos and other resources interesting and/or useful in the past, you may be interested to know that I'll be presenting a series of master classes in various parts of the world in the coming months. I recently posted an announcement elsewhere on the forum: [ANN] FileMaker Master Classes - 2015 While the master classes do include discussions about specific techniques, including some of those featured in various demos, the main focus is the thinking behind these and other approaches, placing them within a wider framework for advanced FileMaker development. Regards, Ray
  7. Building on the success of classes offered for the first time in Europe last year, an announcement has gone out today about a new series of three-day FileMaker Master Classes offered from March to June 2015 in: • San Francisco (March 2015)• Berlin (April 2015)• London (April 2015• Westport CT (May 2015)• Sydney (May 2015)• Tokyo (June 2015) The classes are unashamedly targeted at advanced developers, and are packed with high level content ranging from designing for scalability, advanced development techniques, process control, FileMaker application and deployment models, solution design perspectives to code logic. From the 'brochure': "These intensive three-day seminars are dedicated to expanding your knowledge and broadening your approach to FileMaker development." Full details including event dates, pricing, locations, detailed content outlines and online registration can be found at: The deadline for registrations for the first four locations (San Francisco, Berlin, London and Westport) is 23 February. It would be great to meet some of you at one of the events in this series! Regards,Ray
  8. A further update on this today... The twelfth demo in this latest series is now available for download and is listed at the same location as the original group - ie at: The latest addition is a new/updated version of the "Dynamic Layout" technique we first published for FileMaker 9 back in 2008. While the basic concept is similar, v2.0 includes some additional functionality, an updated interface and shows a variant of the techniques that have been adapted to make use of the expanded feature set of FileMaker 13. Regards, Ray
  9. Hi Folks, A quick heads up for those who may be interested... An additional demo has now been added to the set, bringing the total number in this group to eleven. You'll find it on the same page as linked in the first post in the thread. The new demo shows an updated FileMaker 13 technique for viewing found records in a portal - with the portal contents dynamically updating as the found set changes. We've published demos on this subject before (for FileMaker 5.5 and FileMaker 8) but the approach in this one is all new. FWIW, the new demo also includes a custom Find interface and a portal-based navigation system, so there are several things going on... Regards, Ray
  10. I'm pleased to announce the availability of the first group of a series of new and updated demo and example files for FileMaker 13. The first ten demos in this series are available immediately and include a mix of new techniques based on the features of the FileMaker 13 platform, along with updated versions of some of our previous demos (reworked in light of the new features). This set of demos showcases a number of our favourites among the features of FileMaker 13. Eight of this first set of FileMaker 13 demos are unlocked, so that you can access the code. Two are preview-only (code available to registered users). These include an update to version 2.0 of our UltraLog audit tracking system (which is a free upgrade for paid licensees of version 1.0), plus a Custom Status Panel system that replicates the navigation functionality of the Status Toolbar (including a 'draggable' slider) as a compact native layout object group. Other demos in this group include a new three-way interface system for portals, a new take on showing progress indicators, our fourth and final demo of active row highlighting, a new method of highlighting search text in a field, an updated and extended distinct values toolkit and more... Links to the info and download pages for each of the new demos can be found at: Further demos are planned (also a mix of new techniques and updates to earlier examples) and will be published at the above link when available. Regards, Ray
  11. Daniel, The fact that you were trying to include the word "Calculation" within a calculation formula suggests that you're not at all familiar with syntax in for form I posted it, nor with FileMaker calculation syntax, for that matter. That being the case, it is going to be pretty difficult for anyone here to communicate a solution to you, without actually simply doing it for you. I will go one step further than I did in my previous post, and provide you with a simplified file that contains the script I described. Perhaps looking at this example will give you the information you were unable to parse from the words I posted.
  12. Reading between the lines, it sounds like there may be some redundancy in the data design. Reconciling conflicting order statuses across two tables ("Order" and "CustomerOrder") might not be necessary if the structure were approached a little differently. At any rate, as described it is unclear. Notwithstanding that, assuming there is a relationship that is based on a match between the Order::InvoiceNo and CustomerOrder::OrderNo fields, it should be possible to achieve something analogous to the status update procedure outlined above using script code along the lines of: Go to Layout[“Order” (Order)]Perform Find[Restore: Find: CustomerOrder::Status: “C” Omit: Order::Status: “R”]If[not Get(LastError)] Replace Field Contents[No dialog; Order::Status; Calculation: "S"] Replace Field Contents[No dialog; CustomerOrder::Status; Calculation: If(CustomerOrder::Status = "C"; "R"; CustomerOrder::Status)] Go to Related Record[show only related records; Match found set; From table: “CustomerOrder”; Using layout: “CustomerOrder” (CustomerOrder)] Constrain Found Set[Restore; Find: CustomerOrder::Status: “R”]End If Since the method described in this code snippet is using the Replace Field Contents command, it would be unsuitable for use in a hosted solution (ie it would fail silently if any record locks were encountered). If the solution is hosted, a loop construct to update the statuses would be a better idea, since it would enable you to trap for errors in a record-by-record basis.
  13. Hi Genevieve, A few comments and responses to the things you raised... Assuming the method in question is one that involves triggering a script that sets a value into a global field in the current table, it isn't one step less (both it and the X4X method use a trigger to call a one-step script), and in my own tests it was slower in every case, not faster. Meanwhile I believe that "less reliable" would be a reference to the fact that highlighting methods that depend on a value in a global field (or any other field) are apt to produce undesirable results when there is more than one window displayed (*all* windows that show the same layout on the current workstation show the highlight in the same record, even if different records are active in each window). As I noted above, that has not been my experience. The X4X ActiveHighlight demo was tested extensively with over 20k records including related records (where the related table also had over 20k records and fields from the related table were included on the list layout) and showed no perceptible slowdown on any of the test systems I ran it on. It remained fast (actually, very fast), including when running over the network from Server v10 with multiple users connected. In all those tests the X4X technique outperformed row highlighting techniques based on WV, global field or plug-in methods. I am *not* however questioning your results, just letting you know that they are not the same as my own. What my tests did not include, however were: 1) unstored calculations with cascading dependencies, or 2) complex relationships graphs with significant duplication of content and/or a large number of cached joins. Both these can impact performance, including display and refresh response times. In particular, and as a general principle, list layouts and unstored calculations are not a good mix, especially if the unstored calculations themselves reference other unstored calculations which in turn reference still other unstored calculations etc. That's because in order to display each row, FIleMaker must unravel the whole chain of dependencies, sourcing the raw values and computing each result it turn before it can commence evaluation of the next. That can be a problem at any time, but on a list layout where to simply draw the display the process must be repeated multiple times it is especially undesirable. It is preferably to avoid over-use of unstored calculations and in particular, unstored calculations that have cascading dependencies (on other unstored calcs, on related data, or both). The desirability of avoiding these combinations becomes still more important when long list layouts with large record counts are involved. And that is generally true as a solution and interface design principle, regardless of the use of ActiveHighlight or related techniques. A more viable interface model would be one where only essential stored data fields are included on the list layout, with other derived values (including those generated via unstored calcs) either being: a] revealed on a record-by-record basis when the user rolls the mouse over a given record, b] shown on demand in a pop-up window or on a detail layout accessible with one click from the list, c] shown only for the active record - eg in the header or footer, or d] calculated as a snapshot at a point in time prior to the display of the layout and stored. One might say that while FileMaker does give you the rope to hang yourself with, it doesn't force you to put it around your neck. Yes, you could expect the latter to marginally faster, though the actual impact would depend on a number of factors from graph design (including the nature and complexity of the relationships to Related1, Related2 and Related3) to processor configuration, to LAN speeds and more. Faster still, though, would be a single calc that returned the three results combined as an array, with the formula specified as: Let([ f1 = Related1::A * Related2:; f2 = f1 * Related3::C; f3 = f1 * 1196]; f1 & " " & f2 & " " & f3 )But this would still be a compromise from the POV of interface design, since you're burdening the processor heavily to render a whole list of these every time the screen is drawn, scrolled or otherwise subject to user interaction. FileMaker is one of the few database environments that even allows you to do this - hence my remark about rope above. That's not my experience at all, Genevieve. And as I mentioned, with over 20,000 related records, a Server-deployed copy of the ActiveHighlight_v3 demo here did not show a perceptible performance slow-down. It depends greatly on *how* the file is built, including how the graph is designed. As for "Graph redundancy", that's a pretty big topic in itself, but I was referring to approaches that require the repetition of a lot of graph elements, that result in a high ratio of TOs to base tables (eg anything approaching or exceeding 10:1 is getting right up there!) and a correspondingly high total number of cached joins, all of which Filemaker has to track and manage for almost every action. Not really a topic one can do justice to in a forum thread - but I believe there may be a white paper on it floating around somewhere. :wink2:
  14. Hello genevieve, Thanks for your comments. Let me first say that I agree with your final remark (though it was addressed to FMI...) - that we still need a native way to accomplish custom record highlighting in list view. I hope you've already requested it at the FileMaker Feature Suggestions page. But, that aside, I must say my experience and perspective differs from yours. Although I have been credited with originating the WV refresh technique, I don't really like it and have in not fact ever used it in a deployed solution. One of the reasons I don't like it is I have not found it to be particularly fast. On the other hand, the method shown in the X4X active highlight demo tested fasted than four other methods (including the global field method and the WV method) here prior to publication of the demo. The test included plenty of related data. If you're seeing a slow-down especially when related fields are involved, I suggest that first you confirm that the "Flush cached join results" option is not enabled for the Refresh Window[ ] script step. Failing that, I would suspect a non-optimal design involving either cascading dependencies and/or graph redundancy, either of which can slow a solution down, including screen draws. While my own observations to date have put v3 highlight approach ahead of the WV highlight technique for speed as well as convenience and simplicity, it's interesting to note that you are seeing a different result on your hardware and with your own solution. I guess that is a good pointer to anyone thinking of implementing any such techniques - to check how it works "in situ" before you deploy. :smirk:
  15. Thanks for catching that, Daniele. I had omitted a null trap. Oops. I've corrected it, and an updated version (1.0v2) is posted to the demos page now. Let me know if you spot anything else that needs attention! :P