avoiding 'no values defined' message

[mscholtz]

I'm pretty sure what I want here is not possible in FMP, but thought I'd double check.

I've got a checkbox field that is conditional. Depending on other fields, it'll sometimes show some options, sometimes others. In addition, I want it to sometimes offer no options - in other words, it should sometimes be blank.

I can get my value list to be empty when it should be, but then the checkbox field, instead of being blank, shows a single checkbox labeled "no values defined".

I take it there's no way to avoid that in this case, without using a layout trick like selectively hiding the field using a portal?

(I was hoping to avoid that because the field in question is already IN a portal, and I'd rather not switch this layout to a list-view unless absolutely necessary.)

Thanks!

M.

[Søren Dyhr]

without using a layout trick like selectively hiding the field using a portal?

But it have some reluctance to react to changes in conditions, you often times find yourself clicking outside a field to freshen. I would approach it differently...

--sd

disguise.zip

[mscholtz]

Thanks for your reply, that's a clever trick, but this isn't at all what I need in this case.

I'm really thinking that the answer to my question is no, but if anyone knows otherwise, please let me know.

[comment]

I think a checkbox field is ALWAYS going to show at least one checkbox. About the only thing you could do here is present a dummy value instead of "no values defined" (and then filter it out in case user decides to select it).

But I don't understand why hiding the field would necessitate moving to a list view. You could have two portals, one with the checkbox field, the other one without - each in its own tab panel. The actions that cause the value list to be empty could also cause the tab control to switch to the other portal.

[mscholtz]

Thanks, comment.

The reason is that the checkboxes need to be visible or not on a child record-by-child record basis (hope that makes sense), rather than being applied uniformly to every record displayed.

In other words: I need to be able to display a list of records, whether in a portal or in a list view. And then each record needs to offer the checkboxes or not, based on other data in the record.

I think I'm going to go with the list view. There will be other drawbacks to that move that I haven't gone into here, but I'm pretty sure it's the lesser of two evils.

Thanks, everyone.

[Søren Dyhr]

Meanwhile did I come up with a weird idea, including both repeaters as well as a CF ...but the technique as such is still in its teething, the incarnations of the checkbox values moves slightly even though I tried to tie them. Further more have I absolutely no idea if it will work on windows at all - Feel free to ask for further explanations, but perhaps should I provide a link to the thread where the CF originates from:

http://www.clevelandconsulting.com/support/viewtopic.php?t=510

When you try the funktionaly are there several limitations to remember, there is a max lenght of the value at 40 pix, and I gave up figuring out to make an autoenter produce a series of empty boxes, hence the boxify script.

But as such do you enter 0 ... 5 values in a list and press the button to produce boxes, which then are ready to change/toggle.

--sd

Boxify.zip

[comment]

Interesting idea. Could be implemented less expensively, I think (see attached).

But I must say, the "variable portal" looks rather confusing to me, as a user. Perhaps a different UI model altogether might be appropriate for this (whatever 'this' might be).

CustomCheckbox.fp7.zip

[Søren Dyhr]

Perhaps a different UI model altogether might be appropriate for this (whatever 'this' might be)

Indeed my initial thoughts as well, I hessitated to ask too cheeky where such metaphors were pick'ed up!

--sd

[comment]

LOL, then ask politely.