Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


innodat last won the day on January 28 2016

innodat had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

6 Neutral

About innodat

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

FileMaker Experience

  • Skill Level
  • FM Application

Platform Environment

  • OS Platform
  • OS Version

Recent Profile Visitors

3,503 profile views
  1. You are right. I'll do that.
  2. For it to get solved (maybe) 1 year down the road? I apologize for my blatant sarcasm, but that's been my experience with this kind of feedback. It won't help our project. We probably just have to take the user to the browser with the Open URL script step. What I can point out, is that the HTML file is 6MB in size and contains a lot of Base64. Maybe the web viewer on Windows (still) has memory issues. Or the memory FileMaker can allocate to the WebViewer on Windows is just too limited. The client has 3D models which go up to 100MB. This is a small one for testing.
  3. Thank you for this, didn't occur to me to test (silly of me). It's just as fast in Explorer 11 as it is in Edge as it is on macOS (<3sec). Only in FileMaker's web viewer it's excruciatingly slow.
  4. The Web Viewer in FileMaker claims to be using Internet Explorer 11 (tested with above tip from comment). Based on these two resources, I have switched it to display websites in Edge-mode (11001): https://community.filemaker.com/thread/172066 https://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/ie/en-US/19bdbd98-83a3-4787-8d85-7f2d6f0446f9/featurebrowseremulation-code-for-ie11?forum=iewebdevelopment Unfortunately that didn't speed things up a bit. I have since tested this on a Windows 10 system (all up to date) with FMPA 17 in 64bit, as well as a Windows 10 Pro system (up to date) with FMPA 17 in 32 bit. Here's a video that shows the difference: http://www.innodat.ch/download/WebViewer_Speed_Comparison.mp4 macOS: < 3 sec Windows 10 Pro: 148sec I should point out that Windows is running as a virtual machine in this video. A six core i7 Dell Laptop was able to load the Web Viewer in about 20 sec. Which is still unusable in our context though.
  5. FileMaker 17 Thank you for your inputs, I will check that out and post here again
  6. I have come across something very strange: a website which is loading fast within FileMaker's Web Viewer on macOS and painfully slow in FileMaker's Web Viewer on Windows 10. Note that the website loads with adequate speed when called in Microsoft's Edge browser directly on Windows 10. It's only within FileMaker where a (very long) delay happens. Load times macOS browser: 2sec macOS Web Viewer: 2sec Windows 10 browser (Edge): 4sec Windows 10 Web Viewer: ca.20sec Any explanations for this behaviour? Anything we can do about this? See sample file attached... WebViewer.fmp12.zip
  7. Ha! Now it works! I had a typo in the text I typed, which resulted in a "?" - which proves your point exactly: if I can't trust myself, how can I trust my users to type correctly... I will look into a recursive custom function, as there are quite a lot of fields to choose from. Thanks again for pointing me in the right direction!
  8. innodat

    Save Records as PDF on Server 16 - error 800

    Is it possible that the Arial font installed on your server machine is corrupt/defective? While I don't know what the error code means, this reminds me fonts not showing in InDesign or Illustrator. Or maybe it's an old Arial font, TrueType instead of OpenType? Maybe FMS 16 only supports OpenType? I can't find any specifics on this, but might start investigating there.
  9. innodat

    FileMaker 16 Licensing (WebDirect)

    Technically speaking it scales better in FM 16, up to 100 per FMS hardware, up to 500 if multiple servers are clustered. But I agree with Wim: scalability in terms of licensing is non-existent. Which is a shame. But this has been discussed at large by developers with larger corporations as clients and brought to FM's attention countless times. They won't listen...
  10. Thank you so much for your replies! I should have explained the context better, my apologies. I would like users to be able to enter a combination of descriptive text and field names into one single text field, combined with commas and line breaks. I would then want use a calculation/script step that evaluates all of the content of the text field and "pulls-in" information from the referenced fields (hence my usage of the term merge fields, which I realize was not accurate). The syntax of the text field is flexible, what ever works best. I know I can use Evaluate () but I'm not sure how I have to structure this for it to handle multiple fields and "plain text" content. For example, let's assume that users would type into a text field: "Name: " & Name & ", Category: " & Category & "¶Type: " & Type How would I evaluate/process this altogether? As a chunk?
  11. I'm stuck in my thinking.... How would I go about evaluating (getting the content) of multiple fields specified as merge fields in a text field? For example: "Name: " & <<Name>> & ", " & "Category: " & <<Category>> & ¶ & "Type: " & <<Type>> Which would result in: "Title: MyRecordName, Category: MyCateogry MyType" Any input most appreciated!
  12. That's exactly the sample file that I created for this thread and added above... :-) BUT it doesn't solve the problem with the order of the entries. FileMaker re-sorts alphabetically. And that was the actual question of the poster.
  13. innodat

    Keeping focus on record after sort

    See file attached... Untitled.fmp12.zip The idea is that you script the sorting action, memorize the record before the sort command and restore it through a relationship afterwards. You would have to test this against your scenario though, because I'm suspecting that other factors are interfering. I say this, because FileMaker generally stays on the same record, even when sorting. In short, I would have to know more about your exact setup...
  14. I removed my comment because I did not read your question carefully... sorry, I don't know of any solution for the sorting problem. In your scenario that works only in combination custom value lists, I think. Though you could capitalize "ALL" and such values to make them stand out at least? Untitled.fmp12.zip
  15. Thank you all for trying to help! I have taken the time today to separate all of the functionality that's related to this question and put it in a (new) sample file. I realize that the solution might consist of a work-around of sorts, so it's important to have the context. In the file attached you can see an attempt to emulate FileMaker "native" find mode within a user's UI (does not require visibility of status bar). A crucial part of this workflow is the insertion of search operators. Most search operators are not problematic. You can insert them by means of script without any issues. The problem exists with > or < operators. Filemaker immediately complains about "invalid find criteria". When wrapped in quotation marks, these are inserted into the field without any error messages. The challenge then is (that's what this thread was originally about) to remove the quotes. Unless there is a better way.... altogether? SearchOperators.fmp12.zip PS: use the "Enter Find Mode" button to get started - the rest should be obvious.

Important Information

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