The Field Factory - vs. 7 only

[LaRetta]

Good grief, what a name! The Field Factory? Well, I'm very excited about this so I want to make it available. If you care about conditional displays of background colors on a field - or displaying labels or messages over fields - AND you need these effects to happen on a per-field basis (based upon other calculations or conditions), read on ...

There are many times when it would be nice for a field background to highlight, ie, User enters 'Contractor' in another field and you want a Commission field to turn blue; or you want the field label inside the field to save layout space (and unclutter the layout). Or maybe the Business wants a particular message over a field, directing a User. Each time a Business changes what they want, the Developer must change that field on all layouts - whether it's renaming a label or adding a calculation to highlight the background. No more. Put this functionality in place first. If Management changes what they need, make one change to a calc and all copies of that field throughout your solution will change accordingly. Lables need not be in the fields. You can place them anywhere.

It can now be accomplished with only one calculation (text) placed over all your fields; and only one calculation (container) placed under all of them. I call this sandwiching effect the Field Factory because I now stack all three for every field on every layout, throughout my solution. I may not use them. But when I need to (or when the Business changes their mind on what they want), one simple change to one calculation will affect this field on every layout automatically. If one has a report of course, you don't need the 'sandwich' field as a regular field will do for printing. But if you want Users to see dynamic differences between the fields, this works quite well.

Don't let field stacking intimidate you. After you've done one field, you will see it is very quick and easy. I have also attached a word.doc explaining it in detail so anyone can do it. When I have time, I will refine this process so it can be turned over to Management and will be controlled totally from Browse mode, utilizing globals and Evaluate(). I hope others find it as useful as I have.

LaRetta

FieldFactory.zip

[BruceJ]

Interesting.

I've managed to work with FMP since version 3 and have never used repeating fields - they were always a thing of mystery to me that I never bothered to experiment with.

Looks like I may have to finally become more familiar with them after seeing this. I especially like the "Things To Do" list. I work in medical record databases and there's always some sort of audit function needed to show if a particular field hasn't been completed yet.

Looks good.

[LaRetta]

Thank you so much for the comments, Bruce.

I have avoided anything to do with Repeating Fields also. With the advent of 7, I decided to take a second look since FM added more functionality to them. The rep calc I use was from Queue! And The Shadow uses reps (with script parameters) in clever ways, particularly his Chess demo (in this same sample section).

Being able to specify which rep to display is powerful! Same with portals now. If you want only the first five related records displayed in a column across the top of your layout - or each record placed independently anywhere on the layout, you can do so in 7! Andy Gaunt showed me that!

I received an email from the Owner last night. He decided that he now wants another field to highlight if it meets certain conditions. I counted 12 locations throughout the solution that I would have needed to add background to the field. Instead, I modified the one background calc and it was done in 20 seconds instead. If he changes his mind again, I'm ready.

7 is incredible!

LaRetta

[Jarvis]

Laretta,

That is really cool!

I never thought about blending the field names with the field data.

Very succinct.

I was thinking about your "TO DO LIST" concept.

I can envision a layout that requires a series of responses but one which you can only see one question at a time. After you answer one question it disappears and another question shows up. The second question that shows up is conditionally related to how you answered the first question.

I am impressed.

Jarvis

[ESpringer]

Thanks, LaRetta!

Very very nifty, still poking around...

I remember trying something a bit like that with blank fields' labels inside the fields (a much cruder version, in FM6), and I turned back because all the fields were turning up without any labels in Find mode. I imagine you might have a streamlined special set of Find routines. But could someone use your Field Factory technique and get the field labels to display somehow in find mode?

Here's my convoluted thought: if there were yet one *more* layer, at the very bottom, and if every layout contained a calc container field that auto-fills with white space in browse mode, then perhaps the field label could be made to show up in find mode? But that would probably require "hard" typing the field names in, exactly what you're helping us avoid. But I thought I'd toss out the thought and see whether you had thought about it too... Do you have a way to have the Owner's on-the-fly field name variants show up in a Find context?

[LaRetta]

ESpringer asked ...get the field labels to display somehow in find mode?

Globals will display in Find. I believe something could be put together but it would require one script (with parameters similar to the Background and Label calcs, holding each field line), to populate the proper underlying global set when the Find script is executed and then clean up after itself when done. It would just pull it's values from the Label calc. You would just place your global reps same as the others. Global calcs won't work - I already tried that.

The fields themselves are transparent, so placing this layer on top of the background but behind the field should do nicely. It would be important to clear the globals when done if you plan to stay on that layout in Browse after the find or you would see both data and global find label. However, I do not allow Finds on regular layouts anyway. But this 'Find Label' could be placed behind the fields on your Find layouts.

Also, portal contents will display in Find Mode if its a broken relationship (at least it did in < 7 ... haven't tested 7 yet on this). So one could also utilize portals as long as the label was above/below the field (they can't share the same space with regular fields). With all the new flexibility of 7, there are many things I think I would try. So many ways to go with this ... I think the main thing is cutting down on all the field changes that I have to do, but still provide dynamic changes.

I will add Find Label capability on my list. I envision Management given a Control Panel for (Browse mode) manipulation. Thanks so much for your ideas.

LaRetta

[LaRetta]

Hi Jarvis!

I can envision a layout that requires a series of responses but one which you can only see one question at a time. After you answer one question it disappears and another question shows up. The second question that shows up is conditionally related to how you answered the first question.

Easy with new 7 portals. Place one portal row. Control the relationship with a global and a calculation. In fact, I swear I've seen this very thing in action but didn't get the time to check under the hood ... either Ray or Andy or The Shadow. Maybe others remember. But yes, certainly possible.

The Things To Do tickles me also! I have a long list of things to 'play' with it!! Many ideas swirling around on that. Thanks for the nice words.

Update: Just got an email from a Developer that was asked if their First Name labels could be changed to First Name Only. No Mr or Mrs. Oh, that one takes the cake! I tried it in Field Factory and it looks really good actually!

[BruceJ]

Update: Just got an email from a Developer that was asked if their First Name labels could be changed to First Name Only. No Mr or Mrs. Oh, that one takes the cake! I tried it in Field Factory and it looks really good actually!

It's amusing how the end user/manager always wnats to find ways to idiot proof solutions. I've seen my share of these prescriptive instructions - instead of trainig the users.

What the managers haven't learned: soon as you go an idiot proof something, they'll invent a better idiot!

[MoonShadow]

For once I disagree with you Bruce.

"I've seen my share of these prescriptive instructions - instead of training the users."

Staff turnover rates are high (and very costly) for most businesses. The cost is retraining. The initial instruction phase (and ongoing support) should include every known method to assist Users. Otherwise, it's the Managers that have to train the new people and correct the problems.

My belief is that we should free Users from having to be computer experts and document magicians so they can effeciently focus on their regular jobs; sales, therapists, shippers, and the rest. If highlighting a credit card field as a reminder to verify the number helps Users, then I'll highlight. I want to walk them through their jobs (and their day) with minimul stress. Let the computer remember details for them; the less they have to remember the happier they will be, and the more they will love the Program.

Oh. The Mr. and Mrs.? I like the idea.

[bruceR]

Note that you can even make the data fields auto-enter from the repeating fields. So you never have to enter data into the standard fields. This can give you a lot of control over what goes into the data fields. It can also do something very interesting. I'm not going to try to explain it right now - but you can create relationship schema entirely with data. I was already creating single file multi-table systems in 6. Now the technique is easier to do and more powerful. Add new tables and fields without touching Define fields. So your 20 second example goes FAR beyond just adding a field.

[LaRetta]

Hi Bruce, I don't know if you're talking to me or Moonshadow but I'm intrigued. I originally considered Auto-Enter (Replace) ... God, I love that feature; however, I didn't think it wise to mix labels with data. I didn't want the label to suddenly appear in a Value List!! Or staff be unable to find an empty field because it contained a label.

But you are saying much more... I sure hope you will share your ideas here soon in samples. I adore unusual and off-the-wall solutions - it tickles me and expands my thinking.

[Ugo DI LUCA]

Hi LaRetta,

With this kind of feed-back, I'd sure crack the clock of my Mac to have a look.

After digging my hardrive, I slightly modified an old file (v5) which maybe is what Bruce was referring too.

But it surely does a million less than yours.

AutoLabels.zip

[Jarvis]

LaRetta,

You once spoke of a solution for theater tickets, or motel room reservations.

Couldn't this be used as a graphical representation of product availability?

You said you didn't think it wise to mix Auto enter data with the labels.

Could you enter the data into the middle of the sandwich with a value list?

Jarvis

[LaRetta]

Hi Jarvis,

Using repeating fields to represent graphic display of grids is quite powerful. Against popular belief, you can apply scripts (using parameters) to each repetition. And since you can control which reps display, it is easy to use the same rep field. For instance, graphic row 1 might consist of reps 1-10, row 2 would be 11-20, etc. If you want to really understand some of the power of this, check out demos posted by The Shadow here in Samples (particularly Chess) and, most definitely check out his website (link is included in his demo posts).

"Could you enter the data into the middle of the sandwich with a value list?"

Not sure what you are thinking here. I am just learning repeating fields and have just started accumulating posts and demos on the subject. But if you are asking if you can set various repetitions with values from a Value List, the answer would probably be 'yes' but these would be questions for Queue or Ugo or others who are 'up' on repeating field manipulation.

Maybe you could post your specific question on it. I would be very interested in the responses to these types of questions so I can learn it also.

LaRetta

[AbsoluteVoice4u]

[color:"blue"] LaRetta............... You are just amazing. Your information, your wording and your sense of humor are beyond refershing. You have me proud to be a new member of this forum.

Just wanted to post a formal thank you, for being you and being here.

[HarryGlos]

LaRetta,

Your "Field Factory" is really great... It has some ideas i'd never even considered and I thank you for sharing it. I don't think i've used repeating fields since 4.0... I'm curious, what got you going in this direction? I'm always fascinated at what gets us started.

Thanks again LaRetta, It's been awhile since i've had so much fun tinkering!

Harry

[LaRetta]

Hi Harry ... sorry it took so long to respond. I'm implementing my first network and I'm more nervous, anxious and over-protective than a new parent.

"I'm curious, what got you going in this direction?"

It was just timing, Harry. I have a list of 'things I must solve' and allowing labels within a field was one of them. It has been on my list for quite some time but I was never happy with a different calculation for each. It had been placed on back-burner.

I was recently studying 7's global calculation repetions, Get(CalculationRepetitionNumber) etc. and the new functionality FM7 allows -- being able to specify which rep to display, for instance. So, when Dan Brill posted his thoughts on labels within fields, my mind almost exploded with excitement. I, like you, know little about repetititons and if it hadn't been for Queue's calculation, I probably would still be trying to put it together. Having an idea is only part of the equation ...

I still plan to pull this into Browse mode so Management can specify the calculations, background colors and label names. I just haven't had the time. I'm glad you enjoyed the concept. There is so much more that can be done with this idea. I look forward to see how others take advantage of FM's new ability to place specific rep numbers on layouts. FM7 is such a kick in the pants!

[HarryGlos]

Hi LaRetta

Sounds like you have your hands full...

I'm implementing my first network and I'm more nervous, anxious and overprotective than a new parent.

I'll never forget my first FielMaker network. 6 Pc's and 9 Mac's! Thank God we servive the first one! I'm really pleased you got as excited as you did and created "The Field Factory". It's an excellent development tool and I've learned from it!

FM7 is such a kick in the pants!

FM7 really is a great product and I seem to learn something new about it almost everyday. I'm amazed at the knowledge so many have of a product that has been out such a short period of time. Like someone posted not long ago... We're not in Kansas anymore...

See ya LaRetta and keep thinking up all that good stuff,

Harry

[LaRetta]

Hi Dewey,

Sorry ... I've been so busy this post almost got past me. Thank you so much for the nice words - much nicer than I deserve. FileMaker is my passion and most folks here have become my family. I feel blessed indeed to be a part of this community.

LaRetta

[powerbookstuff]

hi laretta,

i have done the following using mac os 9.2.2 & filemaker pro 6.0.4.

here

[powerbookstuff]

hi laretta,

i have done the following using mac os 9.2.2 & filemaker pro 6.0.4.

here

[LaRetta]

Hello there Will!

I'm intrigued by what you've put together. The concept of universal implementation is one I was anxious to explore - consistency using Preferences and the ability to mass-produce successful design with minimul resources is in my book. I'm pleased that you took these ideas forward for us. Things make little sense to me until I get my hands on them and I hope we'll see a demo, Will.

In addition to field labels, I would also like to further explore the flexibility provided by total Browse-Mode control for field background highlighting; possibly using Evaluate (vs. 7) on a text field or other methods. Actually! SecureFM with MenuMagic just popped into my mind also, but any event-based plug-in might be worth considering over unstored calculations. So much to consider with FM!

It must be very user-friendly (I envision checkboxes and a calculation-creation 'scripted' selection process. It would also allow specifying which layouts the backgrounds affect. Now ... I realize this is like giving a drum-set to a 3-year-old ... the kid may become a musician but his parents will hate ya. But usually these types of requests come from Users for data-entry clarity and that's important.

The idea is to provide flexible options for Management and save Developer-time but not overload a solution with unnecessary fields and calculations. It is a balance. Most Developers get a feel for what Users might want and can factor that in. Fields which contain a handful of possible values (value lists) are worth stacking a background behind while a unique ID isn't. And internal field labels are absolutely beautiful displayed in portals (particularly address fields) where labels are too small, take up valuable space and clutter the portal.

I've been highly pressed for time (in a good way) and won't be able to explore your ideas (and this whole concept) for a bit but I look forward to it. I'll have more to say about it down the road; Developer solutions are a work (and love) in progress for me. Thank you for sharing your ideas!

Oh. You also have a duplicate post and you might delete that if you can. Oh, and your on/off tickles me also.

LaRetta

[Genx]

... If only i had seen this before i made a seperate highlighting calc for each of my fields.

~Genx