Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Archit3kt

  • Rank
  1. you guys are right! my boss is right....i did think about it a bit, and i do see. he is right, bless him, but not for the reason he thinks. it's not just about managing the number of fields, or the length of scripts, is it? neither of those factors alone should be reason to use a structure that limits the potential for expansion or development in the future. a flat solution would actually make some permanent barriers that would be more difficult than the scripting i'll have to do for 3 tables in the beginning. I thought I was thinking further ahead than him (which is true), but i was
  2. my boss wants me to make a database to manage a "new product development process". every time we go through the process, we go through the same 63 steps. each step has an owner, a due date, a deliverable, a comments section, and a status. we have to follow the 63 steps in order, in 5 "phases". I believe it would be most simple to make 1 table with fields like this: step1_owner step1_duedate step1_deliverable step1_comments step1_status step2_owner step2_duedate step2_deliverable step2_comments step2_status step3_owner ....and so forth. Each project wou
  3. sweet, I'll use IsEmpty()... I agree with you, comment, that related records in a line items table is much cleaner. However, I'm not sure how to handle this aspect: one "part" (a record in the related line items table), say a nut or a bolt, needs to be related to many records in the first table, because that first table is a "build order form" that gets printed out every day, and is a running history of using various combinations of these same parts. If we change one of the parts, say, we decide to make the bolt out of a different metal alloy, and change the record in the "line items tabl
  4. I have a database serving as a requisition form for kitting parts for manufacturing--there are 10 text fields to specify items (nuts, bolts, washers), and 10 fields for the quantities of those items. Part of a script determines the item with the lowest quantity, returns the name of the item, and then subtracts that quantity from all the other items. The user will not always use all ten fields, and I want to tell the script to skip fields that are empty, but it needs to treat fields with a value of "0" differently, and include them in the rest of the calculations. Will that work? the pertinent
  5. Hi guys, I am rooting for everyone East of me.....I exported my database to tab-separated text, and then screwed with the database, and now I want to re-import that tab file, but when matching field names they aren't showing up! uuuughhhh i feel sick......in the import screen, the "field names" column for the source file are showing both field names and field values from the first record, and not all field names are there!! am I screwed? Is there a way to salvage the tab file and match all the field names up??
  6. Can somebody show me a script to search a field in all records, look for extra space at the end of the value, and delete it? In our company's contact management dbase, many of the users accidentally add a space at the end of a company name, and then the company appears twice on value-based drop-down lists ("solar city" and "solar city ").
  7. workflow is a good point. if what I "need" to do is difficult, maybe re-evaluate why i got to the point that I think I need that in the first place. But I've put myself in this place for now, and I need a short-term bandaid before re-evaluating the entire workflow. I like the idea of importing to a separate table, then it's inside FMP and i can run all sorts of scripts on the data. heck yeah! I'll start giving that a shot tomorrow morning, any script suggestions are appreciated in the meantime! to search for matching records with some logic loop, and then go to each field and evaluate if
  8. Hey guys, I'm trying to import contacts/customers from an excel spreadsheet, and I want it to ONLY add new records and SKIP matching records. This seems simple enough, but it seems the import options allow everything BUT that.... So instead, I thought I would settle with updating matching records as long as I don't lose data. This may actually be preferable since peoples' email addresses may have changed, etc. However, the source file is like swiss cheese, and I want it to skip empty fields when updating a record, but still update the rest of the fields in a record. Now I'm seeing that in
  9. AH figured it out, i had unchecked the "allow access to filemaker server" and this happened when we brought the database from my computer to our office server. FIXED thanks
  10. yes, and that account works fine, but I need to make limited access USER accounts, and I can't get anything to work besides Admin
  11. I just made a database from the Contact Management starter solution, uploaded some contacts, added a couple of table occurrences for conditional value lists, and everything works....but then I created a user account, and tried logging in and it won't let me! as soon as it validates the username/password, this error comes up: and then it boots me back to login. I cannot open as a guest, or as a user with data-entry-only privileges. I haven't messed with any of the privilege sets! It's the template security settings! how do I troubleshoot this? there must be some script that's running
  12. Is it possible to change the permissions to disallow the user from creating a record in a particular layout? I don't want the user to be able to create a record that isn't immediately linked with a record in my second table, so I have a portal in the second table's "detail view" layout where they can add a related record.....but I want to have a "detail view" layout of the first table that shows more fields, but won't allow record creation. I have a table of companies, and a table of contacts that's linked via an ID# field. The user can add a contact from a portal in a company's record in
  13. ah, crap, that just means the missing step is employee competency.....we need to just train our staff not to make records and leave them blank and move on, or to create a task for someone and not fill in the freaking description (THEY CANT READ YOUR MIND, YOU MUST TELL THEM WHAT TO DOOOOO) hahahahah
  14. 1) that's the answer! thank you, didn't see that invisible rectangle. 2) you're right, the order of entry isn't really important...I just want to make sure the user cannot leave a record without filling in all the fields. I've set all fields to validate during user entry, require "not empty", not allow user to override during entry. But after doing that, I can still log in as a user and make a new record, click into and out of a required field (no dialogue), or navigate to another record without being stopped. Dang it!! If I click into a required field and type something, and THEN erase
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.