Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About dual_mon

  • Rank
    Cat Lover
  • Birthday 12/09/1970

Profile Information

  • Title
    Director of Engineering
  • Industry
    Software Consulting
  • Gender
  • Location
    Los Angeles

FileMaker Experience

  • Skill Level
  • FM Application

Platform Environment

  • OS Platform

FileMaker Partner

  • Certification
  • Membership
    FIleMaker Platinum Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Interesting. Well first off I suggest that you download Carafe Kitchen 3.1.1 which is the latest version. https://carafe.fm/downloads/ We did actually have a deployment bug with WebDirect encoding, and I'd have to research to find out which specific version the fix was in, but there's a good chance you have a version with that bug in it.
  2. Thank you both for your questions. There is nothing inherently incompatible with Web Viewers and Web Direct. The problems you are experiencing could either be with the bundle implementation itself, or something with how Carafe is or is not properly handling encoding for WebDirect. Could you both comment back with details about which version of Carafe Kitchen you are using, and for @smower which bundle(s) you're trying?
  3. I'm not sure I agree here. Perhaps an API interface file could ship with some example scripts, but if this type of thing is baked into the core Carafe.fmp12 file, you'd either have to live with exactly one set of use cases, or always have to port your mods over to it any time the core file is updated. On the other hand, if you maintain a separate API file, you would be much more likely to be able to retain specialized use cases like the automation integration you are going for without skipping updates to the core file.
  4. Very cool idea. Simple to add some URLs as you suggest, so I'll include some in 3.1.0 As far as the specific suggestions you've made, I'll end up doing a few things slightly differently. I'll comment on them in order. Referencing the home page for Carafe makes sense The "author" in Workdpress differs from the bundle creator. The author is effectively the publisher entity, and (as in fact is the case) can represent multiple creators. So I think this isn't a huge advantage over the prior and next links. I'll probably leave this out. Bundle "homepage" is a new feature of
  5. In case you missed it, we recently released a new major version of Carafe. Check out my blog post with a summary of what's new https://www.soliantconsulting.com/blog/carafe-3-update/ We also put out some new video content along with the v3 release including these two videos: A 2 minute demonstration of adding a Carafe bundle to an existing FileMaker solution. https://www.soliantconsulting.com/soliant-tv/deploy-carafe-v3-bundles-video/ A half hour how-to showing the steps for wiring up your existing FileMaker solution to provide the required data structure for the updated Goo
  6. Hey, thanks very much for the kind words and enthusiasm. We are getting ready to release 3.1.0 this week, which includes some bug fixes and enhancements. I'm going to see if we can fit in any or all of these suggestions. If not, I'll let you know what's going on at the very least. Thanks for the very detailed feedback.
  7. Which JavaScript libraries would you like to see Bundled for Carafe/WS that aren't already available? Please feel free to add your own and upvote any you agree with. You can also suggest Bundles that have implementations with alternate implementations suggested.
  8. dual_mon


    Thanks to FMForums for providing a dedicated place to discuss topics related JavaScript WebViewer integration. This is a new and exciting specialization for FileMaker and JavaScript developers. I look forward to seeing this community grow. Jeremiah
  9. I think comment hovers six inches off the floor. He probably thought that up while he was making himself a sandwich.
  10. Okay, sorry for the long delay. (been a busy month!) Hope you can still use the advice. Since you already understand the concept of a self join to find duplicates, you are half way there. What I am suggesting is that you make a self join relationship using the three letter text field as the key field. This will return the set of all records that have the same three letter prefix. Once you have established this set of records, it is then possible to calculate the maximum value of the number field using the calculation Max ( field ) + 1. What Max of the self join does is return the hig
  11. Okay, setting the issue of *why* aside, I don't think I would handle this with a CF. I would consider building the desired result as a concatenation made up of a text field populated from the first three characters of the name (except "the" etc as the case may be), and a number field that you store in the record which is populated with the max + 1 based on a self join by the text field. Of course exactly what triggers the max + 1 would be contingent on your business rules. While an auto enter calc is one option, it would be most robust IMHO if the field were poplated by a script which wou
  12. Okay, first of all... WHY!!! Second of all... You could do this in a number of ways. One way that comes to mind is to sort by the client number and then loop through the records starting with the lowest number, testing each one to see if it equals the previous client number + 1. When you find a gap or reach the end, use that number. Third of all... Please use a subject line that is informative about what the thread is about. Subject: HELP!!! is very bad netiquette.
  13. You might also consider adding a Boolean attribute to your parent records which bestows template status on a record, allowing you to filter it out in finds and so forth. You can also use conditional record level access in your privilege sets to determine who is alowed to create and modify templates. This technique eliminates the need for a parallel template infrastructure. PS If you have an Advisor subscription, you can check out this article that I wrote on duplicating hierarchies. http://filemakeradvisor.com/doc/16095
  14. First of all, congratulations. This looks like a real eye-crosser. A few comments: You may have caught on to my preference for not exposing "utility" parameters. Recursive_Create_Folder ( start; stop; DrivePath; Save Path; Fpath; OS; FL_Name ) is just too confusing. I would pare it down to this for the "exposed" function: TrFilePath ( FileName ; SrcPath ; DstDrive ; DstPath ) Or better yet: TrFilePath ( FileName ; SrcPath ; DstPath ) Notice that I renamed the parameters that I kept to be more explicit about what input is needed. Second, I got rid of the counte
  15. I agree with BobWeaver. Here are the relevant definitions from dictionary.com. en
  • Create New...

Important Information

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