Question from a newbie - required value

[TenTwentyFour]

Hi,

Brand new to FM. I probably don't even know the terminology well enough to ask a question in a way that can be understood, so I'd appreciate your patience as well as any advice.

I'm sure there's a simple way to get around this problem, but I haven't seen it. I have a text field on a layout that has to be filled in. But I want to allow for the case where a user starts to enter data, then changes her mind and wants to go elsewhere without entering anything.

I set the field to be a "Required Value". But that seems to make it impossible to get out without entering something. In fact, I can't even seem to bail out of FM without entering something. I need a harmless way for the user to say "nevermind" part-way through the entry.

Can someone guide me?

Thanks,

1024

[Søren Dyhr]

In stead of wrestling with an explanation, have I made a template for you, here above is a red marking of the crutial issue in this method, enjoy....

--sd

NotEmptyValidate.zip

[TenTwentyFour]

Many thanks, sd! That seems to do the trick.

I'd like to make sure I understand what you're doing so that I can make it work myself the next time. If you don't mind, I'd like to ask a few questions:

1. In the jpeg you attached, it appears that the line you circled in red reads "Validate only if field has been modified." In my version (FMP 8.5, XP), that line reads "Do not evaluate if all referenced fields are empty". Am I looking at the right thing?

2. Your "ignore" field is auto-entered from the evaluation, "Evaluate ( Case(0;0);[ field1;field2;field3;field4])". Is "Case(0;0)" just a dummy evaluation here?

3. The "never mind" button that shows up has the label "Revert" (I gather this label may be "Ignore" in your version). Is there a way to change that text string to something more easily understood?

Thanks again for the help.

1024

[Søren Dyhr]

Am I looking at the right thing?

No you're not I'm afraid, the dialog you refer to is the one belongning to straight forward calc's not the dialog found when applying a calculated validation.

Is "Case(0;0)" just a dummy evaluation here?

No it isn't although filemaker takes a liberal attitude to typecasts will Evaluate(Quote("");[Field1;Field2;Field3;Field4]) make you think that the empty string is synonymious to "NULL" which it by and large seems to be, but putting a type independent undefined value is cleaner relational theory ...something belonging to Codd's rules. Filemaker seeks here to assume what layman seems to understand better, but problems occures when speaking via ODBC/JDBC to a SQL base.

Is there a way to change that text string to something more easily understood?

Everybody complains about this, the messages are more confusing than guiding. Therefore have many developers made thier own message dialogs via scripting instead, which either call for the use of eventtriggers plugins or perpetuate scripting, which means that every script have a looping attached at the very end keeping the script in a waitstate which only can be broken by firing another script from a button which submits the entry.

The problem that arises is the developer need to think carefully of every likely step a user can take in both methods, with ways to deal with a rollback as well in case the user regrets.

--sd

[TenTwentyFour]

Thanks for all the help, sd. Your approach is working nicely (except for FM's silly "revert" label, that is -- for the time being, I've decided that training the users is a lower risk approach than adding a bunch of new scripting simply for the purpose of changing the label).

1024