BruceR

Members
  • Content count

    3,919
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    43

Everything posted by BruceR

  1. This is still confusing and still jumping into the middle of something without describing the basics. Please begin by describing your data structure. What tables are involved; what does your graph look like.
  2. This is an XPOST by the way, from FileMaker Community. https://community.filemaker.com/thread/171923
  3. And therefore FileMaker Server will not allow it to be opened. FileMaker Server 15 does not open no-password files.
  4. No, it is not custom search order. It is custom sort order. You could do web searches for drag and drop portal sort. You will need to add sortOrder field (number field) to the child record table and you will need to sort the relation by this field. To begin using it, have it auto-enter get(recordNumber). Edit it by hand to control sort. Then learn from the available example files how to automate this. Example link: http://www.delfsengineering.ca/blog/2015/3/18/better-drag-sorting
  5. The upside of the record number symbol is that you don't need to define a field. The downside is that if you want to fit {{recordNumber}} into a skinny space; that is difficult. There are some stupid FileMaker pet tricks you can use to resize it but they break if you touch the field. So I often use an unstored calc field, defined as get( recordNumber); and place that on the layout.
  6. +1 for comment's comments. As for a field definition being more easily accessible. Do you have any awareness of the risks of doing that? I suspect not; or you would not have made the statement. Though maybe you just don't have anybody using this system. What happens when you're defining a field while users are entering data? What can happen to the integrity of the file? You want users out of the system when doing this. Thus your timeslot for accessibility is extremely limited.
  7. Answer: no. To a significant extent, it is about making it easy for volunteers here to see enough detail of the solution to be able to help and being considerate of their time. Having seen some of the detail of this solution, this is even more apparent to me. Playing twenty questions, revealing tiny unrepresentative and incomplete slices of a solution for us to review, preventing the company from operating on reliable data; those seem to be important considerations.
  8. Use and MD5 checksum field. (Result is text)
  9. Just drag the image or attachment to the bottom of the reply window. You know; where it says Drag files here to attach.
  10. This isn't really getting anywhere. Statements about trimming have been vague. It may be time to move on and tell the company to work with an experienced developer. It would be very helpful if you could post the file. Or a clone of the file. Or a print-to-PDF or screen shot of the (complete) field and table definitions.
  11. It would be very helpful if you could post the file. Or a clone of the file. Or a print-to-PDF or screen shot of the field and table definitions.
  12. A button can either be set up to make an immediate, single-step action. Or it can be set up to call a script, which takes that action plus does some other things. Set the button to call a script, which uses the set field action you're already performing, followed by: Commit Record Refresh Window [ flush cached join results] Note that it may also help to put a Freeze Window statement as the first line of the script.
  13. So this really has almost everything in common with a standard invoicing system. Customers, products, orders, order line items, prices. And as with invoicing systems, it is sometimes common for orders to consist of a standard group of products.
  14. In some ways, I agree with you here. But - I wonder. Certainly, regarding specific coding skills this is obviously true. But in other ways - I think FileMaker gives us so many great opportunities to learn to make clear definitions of data structures, relational concepts, interface design, scripted workflows, interpretation of customer needs, and the connections between these things. I think this generalized knowledge and skill can be really helpful but I suspect that isn't a widely adopted perspective.
  15. That is not an answer to the question.
  16. And for Comment's benefit, here is a very simple replication as an fp7 version of what is set up so far. Football_Tai_Mod.fp7
  17. I think you need to NOT work on it and figure out what pieces you need. As mentioned by Comment. Are you tracking individual pieces rather than strictly a kit? What happens if somebody loses/breaks something and you issue a new one of those items. You can't do that now. You only have a complete kit or nothing.
  18. Though a number of issues still remain, it is clear that the original relationship was incorrect. See attached screenshot of the original and suggested revision.
  19. Also: "I cannot seem to get the receipt to work properly." is extremely ambiguous. What exactly do you mean by this?
  20. XPOST from Filemaker Community https://community.filemaker.com/thread/169145
  21. Not sure what that means. You would have to discuss how you use this field in perhaps reports or other operations or perhaps in merge layouts, etc. Or for instance, Find operations, where an exact match search would fail because the field contains a return.
  22. Comment, that will include a return in the field. Wouldn't it be better to use getValue ( self; 1) ? Or getValue ( self ; valuecount( self))
  23. Thoughts. Maybe the message means exactly what it says. This application requires OS 10.10.
  24. Mod 2, set up as Comment suggests (change calc to Last( Booked::Booked To ) Test-23Mod2.fmp12.zip
  25. 2. If you sort the RELATIONSHIP instead of the portal; then you can just display the related data directly. 3. There is no need for the extra field. Test-23MOD.fmp12.zip