Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About HarrisonM

  • Rank
  1. Not sure how that will help me if it worked for you? Anyway, here is screen capture of the error it shows upon submitting the form to proceed to download. Tested on Firefox 14, Chrome. Chrome just reloads the page, firefox shows the error. :hmm:
  2. OK, I get it after going through the attached fp7 file. Thank you very much. Case closed :)
  3. Thank you very much for pointing out that article. That article says "In version 9, a field used to match a Number field in a ≠ relationship is considered empty, unless it has an actual number in it." The match fields in my case cSelectedTags and Article_TAGS_forVLunselectedTags::TagID are text fields. Does this mean that I have to use the Serial# field rather than the TagID text field (which is actually an autoenter calculation = SerialIncrement("TAG000000";Serial#). So updated the calculated field with a fictitious tagID "TAG99999999" to be appended to the top of the cSelectedTags The only problem that I now have is that I have to manually refresh the window for the value list to update itself. Selecting a new tagID in the portal does not automatically update the value list to reflect the unselected Tags !!?
  4. For a database for articles, Each article has multiple tags. I have a basic setup with a portal showing records from the join table between Articles and Tags. I am trying to create a value list for tags that updates itself showing only unselected tags for an article. ARTICLES::cSelectedTags is a calculation=List(ARTICLE_TAGS::TagID_fk)&¶ Then ARTICLES::cSelectedTags is connected to a duplicate TO of TAGS::TagID using a not equal relationship operator. A value list is built using this relationship, would exclude the tags selected in the portal ? Attached images show the relationship graph and setup for value lists. For some reason the value list does not work? Any suggestions to fix it?
  5. The link is not working. Fatal error ! Uncaught exception! :hmm:
  6. Thank for the help really. The suggestion would have been useful for us "non-experts in filemaker" if you could explain the "insecurity" in the process. So.. does it mean that restricting access with filemaker privileges is not good enough to deter hackers ? A similar database solution made in MS-SQL in the university has the admin able to upgrade or downgrade user privileges this way. Why would a similar process in filemaker be insecure? Luckily, My humble solution runs on our local computer and is used to log in students into a CBT solution so we can track their performance during the session. Do you mean that if we ever commercialize the solution, we have to hacker proof it on say MS-SQL or Oracle? Cheers
  7. Got it figured with some trial and error. Mods may save space by deleting the original post. Cheers
  8. In my Filemaker solution, I have 2 types of users. Students and Teachers. I have made a login script that checks a users table for the username and password. The plan was to record in the users table, an admin approved name for a privilege set: Students get "Read only access" and Teachers get "Data Entry Access" My questions are: In order for a user to login as a "Student", Should I 1. Manually create a filemaker account called "Student" with [Read-only-Access] and then using the script step "Re-login" using the account "Student" ? OR 2. If the username and password matches, create an account using the script step "Add Account" using the username and password and assign a predefined privilege set - "Student" with [Read-only-Access]. Correct me If I am wrong, For me it seems if I follow option 2, I can implement a log-out script by using the "Delete Account" script step and going to a "Logged out" layout. If Step 2 is the way to go, whats the purpose of a "Re-Login" script step. And how does one implement a log-out after Login in with a "Re-Login" script step?
  9. cool ! for the links. Thanks to eos for explaining that cartesian query. But AllTags actually gets a return separated list of all tag names using the cartesian query. Don't know how that works for me. Anyway the link "comment" posted clarifies how to excluding value lists. Thanks again.
  10. Articles to tags in a database has a many to many relationship. I am using a portal to add tags to an article. How do I create a dropdown list that dynamically removes tag entries already added by the user. Say if the taglist contains "Applescript, bash, ruby, Filemaker" and if the user selects "Filemaker" for Article1 and when trying to add a new tag to Article1 the value list shows only "Applescript, bash, ruby" and so on.. Logic was that if I could connect a return separated list of userSelectedTags from the parent table to a return separated list of all TagNames in the child table using a not equal to relationship, I could use the relationship to show all the TagNames user did not select. When Articles are connected to Tags in a one to many relationship, the dynamic value list works. 1. Table ARTICLES has a textfield called "userSelectedTags" which calculates a return separated list of user selected tags (Calculation from the context of Articles = List(TAGS::TagText)) 2. Table TAGS has a textfield called "AllTags" which calculates a return separated list of all tags from the table TAGS (Calculation = List(TAGS::TagText)) 3. ARTICLES and TAGS are connected using the above fields using a relationship where ARTICLES.userSelectedTags IS.NOT.EQUAL.TO TAGS.allTags 4. Created a value list using the relationship in Step 3 However when ARTICLES and TAGS are connected by a many to many relationship using a join table, The value list is somehow not working. Any ideas where I am wrong? This is what I did: 1. In the many to many relationship, to come up with a return separated list of all tagsNames from the table TAGS, I used a self join to the from TAGS to TAGS2 table between an empty match field and TagNames using a cartesian product relationship. Then I was able to calculate the "AllTags" field using the calculation List(TAGS2::TagName) from the context of TAGS. 2. Then ARTICLES and TAGS were connected between "userSelectedTags" and "allTags" using a relationship where ARTICLES.userSelectedTags IS.NOT.EQUAL.TO TAGS.allTags 3. A value list called "Tags" was made using the setup shown in the picture.
  • Create New...

Important Information

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