Tom T

Hello, I am thinking of upgrading to FM Pro 7. I now have FM Unlimited 6. I have read some of the literature from FileMaker but it does not clearly answer these questions (nor have I found the answers in this forum, but I don't follow it every day and searching doesn't always come up a useful post): FM Unlimited 6 allows unlimited number of people to access a database over the web. Pro 6 has a severe limitation, don't recall exactly, but something like 10 users in a 24 hour period. How many people can access FM Pro 7 over the web using Instant Web Publishing? How about Custom Web Publishing? Any difference? I suspect that one cannot create a database using FM Pro 7 and then try to use it with FM Unlimited 6, right? It appears to me that FM Server 7--not yet out--is the upgrade for FM Unlimited 6. Is this correct? What are its capabilities for allowing many users at the same time? Much thanks to whomever can answer these questions, even briefly. Tom Tomasko

Marianno, I want to thank you very much for your careful--and wonderfully full!--answers to my questions. I will need a little time to digest them. I've gotten a lot out of this thread to explore. One of the questions I raised--about why there is no PHP mini-forum on FM Forums--I'd like to pose again. Perhaps you have no information on why this is so. However, I did notice that FM Forums itself is written with PHP--you can see it in the URL of every page. This raises a further question. I know that PHP can hide the database that underlines a web site. Is FileMaker the database for this web site? Tom

Hello, I am about ready to move away from Instant Web Publishing, which I have found to be an instructive exercise but one with no results. Having almost completed a self-taught course in HTML I am ready to figure out what would be the best programming language to use to enable FileMaker for the web. There are a lot of choices and I

I have found out some information that sheds a little light on this problem of browsers. 1. When one uses IWP (don't know if this is the same with CWP), one can choose different styles in Web Companion. The only two styles that are compatible with both IE and Netscape are Fren Green and Blue and Gold II. I had thought that since I did not want the status area to be visible, this didn't make any difference (because the different styles give you different looking status areas). The above was suggested to me by FileMaker. It did not solve the problem. 2. I called FM back and they fessed up to two things. One, they have sat two people down in front of two Mac computers both using Netscape. One could see a database as designed and the other couldn't. They do not know why. However, FileMaker doesn't support Netscape so they don't care to solve this problem. That's good to know! 3. We switch the FM database to a Windows OS. The database could be seen as we designed it in both IE and Netscape. So it appears that the problem is in the interface between Mac and Netscape. This temporary change won't do us any good because our server is OSX and our main client uses Netscape. So we are now on square two, but no solution yet. Tom

Hello, I finally wrote a decent database for indexing a weekly newspaper. I want to thank everyone who gave me various hints on how to solve a number of problems. I learned a lot. However, there is one big problem that I can

Hello, I am creating a one-field database which will be a list of authors that will be related to a main database. The records in the one-field database will be where new authors are added, edited or deleted and then these records will be the value list in the main database. But I am having a devil of a time with a problem I just don't understand, even before I go relational. Whenever I choose in a pop up list an author to delete I end up deleting a different author! Attached is a very simplified database with 7 records in it. The records are: A1 B2 C5 D3 E7 G6 Z4 I created them in the order of the numbers, but they appear alphabetical in the pop up list. This helped me make sense of the problem, although i do not yet have a solution. In the status area I can choose any record with that little book in the upper left hand corner. In the pop up list I can choose any record. But when I try to delete the record in the field it is the record that is chosen in the status area that gets deleted? Why is that? I want to delete whatever I choose from the pop up list and place in the field. Help! Thanks, Tom DeleteProblem.zip

Dear Queue, I'm not sure I understand your suggestion above. However, I have decided on another route. Instead of a related database, I have a button in the main database that gets me to a one-field database: a list of authors. From there I can add, edit or delete records. The records are the value list. Then in the main database, the value list for authors is the value list from this author list database. This appears seemless to the user, which is what I want. Thanks. Tom

Hello, I

Hello, I decided to attached the the database here because I think that is the only way for someone to see what I am doing wrong. And I'll try to clarify what I wrote above. This database is the beginnings of an index of newspaper articles. It will mainly be used by the staff to do a weekly indexing of each article. They in fact are using a FM database that works perfectly fine but it needs some improvements. Another person and I had developed an improved index database that did not have the problems described above or below. But our latest work has some chinks in it. We can not see the difference between the two. Problem 1: When creating a new record the author and subject fields display a line break and then the value. This pushes the value off-screen. Why is there this line break? If we create new records from the desktop there is no problem. Only when we go thru the browser does this problem happen. Now here is the real mystery (for me): The first author field works perfectly fine, but not the second one. It should be simple to find what is different about them, but there is none that I can see, with one exception. Both fields use the same value list from the first author field. Changing that to using its own value list does not solve the problem. I have even copied from the old good database the fields and important them into the newer one. But the fields get transmuted somehow, displaying the same problem. Problem#2: When a record is edited, the old value in an author or subject field is not erased but simply moves down lower in the field, allowing the edited information to appear on top. Further, even if I don't edit a field, the value duplicates itself. Again, none of this happens on the desk top, only in the browser. In the attached database, I have deleted all but about 8 records so that it is smaller and simpler. If you look at Entry ID #'s 5 and 6 you can see the not-quite-edited problems. If you look at #46973 (the last record, see how many I deleted?) you can see an example of the offending line break. If you do a search by going to the search page and writing >1 in the Entry ID field all of the records will appear. If you go to "View as Table" you can see all the problems nicely lined up. Thanks for any help you can give. Tom Index.zip

Hello, I am having two problems I can't figure out. When I use the database on the desktop, the problems do not occur. They only occur when looking at the database in a browser. I am using IWP. I know, I know, use CWP. I will, just not yet. 1. If I edit a field that has a pop-up list, the value remains in the field and so does the newly edited value I just chose. If I edit any other field that does not have a pop-up list, there is now problem with that field. However the pop-up list fields will have the values twice in the newly edited record. What causes that? #2 If I create a new record the fields with pop-up menus have a line break right before the chosen value. This moves the value down in the field where it can't be seen. If I go to the table view I can see everything just fine, but all the values start on a second line in each table cell. How can I get rid of that line break? Hope this is enough information to go on. Tom

Bob, Thanks for explaining that. I tried what you suggested. I got a different result that what I was expecting. I applied your formula to each of the four fields. What happened was that the values in the first field remained the same (what I want) but that in the other fields the value in the first field is now also the value in all the other fields. Perhaps I haven't clearly explained what I want. I want the four values in each of the four subject fields to remain as they are for each record. No change here. What I want is to combine the value lists of each of the now four separate value lists so that there is one value list to choose from. Now the four separate value lists have both duplicate subjects and the second, third and fourth lists do not have as many values as the first one and in many cases each list has some unigue subjects that the other lists do not have. This gets messy. One big list is better. The question is how to combine the four lists? Then I can define each of the four fields to choose from this one value list. Tom

Bob, I tried your suggestion. Either it, or I, fell flat on the face. The Replace Command syntax is: Replace (text, start, size, replacement text) I substituted: Replace (SubjectField1 & "

I had thought of this solution earlier. I would have to make a repeating field, with say, 4 fields. I decided not to try this solution, at least for now, because I think it will cause a bigger headache. I am developing this database but in fact already thousands of entries have been made to a previous database from which I have imported the records. If I created one repeating field, wouldn't I have to retype the subjects that are now in four fields for each indexed article? I thought I could get around this by making each field have the same values, but as you can see from the above, I haven't figured out how to do that either. Tom

Hello, I am developing an index of articles for a newspaper. We have allowed that each article can have four subjects, so I have created four subject fields. No subject is more important than any other. Of course most articles have only one or two subjects so that the third and fourth field do not have as many values in it. This causes a problem in searching. If one chooses to limit a search by choosing three subjects, say, not all the available values are in the 3rd field. I thought that if I defined each of the fields so that they all have the same values this would solve the problem. So I made it that the values in Subject2 in the pop-up show all the values in Subject2 plus all those in Subject1. But to my surprise, I did not get just one long list but a concatenated one! Suppose Subject1 has A, B and C values and Subject2 has D, E and F as values. What I want is a pop-up list that goes: A B C D E F What I got was: A D B E C F How can I solve this? Thanks, Tom T

I finally solved the problem by making another database that has the date, volume and issue number only. Then I related that database to the main one. This works fine both off and on the web. Thanks for the help. Tom