Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
bluearrow

Hiding one of two related portals

Recommended Posts

Hi,

In a clients table I have:

- PORTAL1: A contact portal.

- PORTAL2: An address portal that shows addresses for the selected contact.

A button in PORTAL1 sets a global field and allows the user to show related addresses for that contact.

The problem is when the user moves from one client record to another client record. Because the global remains, the user sees the wrong PORTAL2 information in every client record.

I have scripted the navigation, so I have he option to empty the global field every time the user moves from one record to another. However, I just do not like this solution. Once the navigation gets complex, I am sure I will get lost and forget to empty the global field in one script or another.

I cannot use the technique of a global driven relationship, because portals within portals do not work in FileMaker.

Using different layouts is not an option (more and more complications). Using different tabs might be an option, but then I would need to script something like a Go to object every time the user moves from record to record: I will be stuck in the same situation as setting the global to empty (the later might be even easier).

I am sure there must be a better way to hide a portal and only show it for the selected portal record when the user navigates from client record to client record.

Remember that the portal I want to hide is PORTAL2, not PORTAL1. PORTAL2 shows related info for the selected record in PORTAL1.

Thanks in advance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since you have scripted nav, I'd say clear it there. Why are you worried about not being able to keep your code straight?

But you could also not base the relationship on the client id in addition to the global, can't you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David said:

But you could also not base the relationship on the client id in addition to the global, can't you?

I believe David meant:

But could you not also base the relationship on the client id in addition to the global?

Or, more direct (though less polite):

Base the relationship on the client id in addition to the global.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you David, Fenton.

Adding the client ID to the relationship did the trick. I had to play around with my TOs a little bit though, because my original relatioship was hanging from a globals TO, not from the client TO. Now it works fine and I do not have to add any steps to my navigation-search-go to related record scripts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

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