Commit/revert record explanation

[PatriciaW]

Hi,

I've been upgrading an FM6 application and since I had not worked with FM before I started this process it has been a learning experience and I've greatly appreciated the advice I've had from forum members ...

Now, I'm having a problem explaining why I decided to add a "Save Changes" button to every data entry layout. I did it because it seemed the most reliable way of validating compound fields. FM6 validations seemed to work well on individual fields, not so well on combinations.

In addition, I had a problem where the user insisted that there be at least one row in a portal.

But, I cannot find a clear definition of the differences between FM6 and FM7 in handling saving fields and records. I would like to be able to explain in lay terms how FM6 saved fields compared to how FM7 does it.

Is anyone aware of a document that has this info? FM7 help may have info but I could not find it.

[Søren Dyhr]

validating compound fields.

What is the use of such?? Do you validate by script?? It violates basic rules of 1 NF... that says one fact per field.

But, I cannot find a clear definition of the differences between FM6 and FM7 in handling saving fields and records.

Read Ilyse Kazars part of "Migration foundations" and you'll discover that ...whats used to, isn't any more.

http://www.filemaker.co.uk/upgrade/techbriefs.html

--sd

[PatriciaW]

What is the use of such?? Do you validate by script?? It violates basic rules of 1 NF... that says one fact per field.

My apologies for sloppy wording. I meant validating based on combinations of fields. The user would put data into mandatory fields just to satisfy the mandatory requirement. I have added a status field which says, in effect, this field is not relevant (and thus I check this status field and do not validate the data.)

I have been doing this because the previous version of this application violated 1NF all over the place. And yes, I validate these rules via scripts although I have the original field validations untouched.

Thanks for the link, I'll check it out. :