Jump to content

Checkbox- visibility of another field?


SLYCV

This topic is 6161 days old. Please don't post here. Open a new topic instead.

Recommended Posts

  • Newbies

Hi, I have been using a couple of FileMaker databases for many years but I've just started to learn developing my own. They were always flat-file db's before. I have several relational db's that I'll be working on, eventually.

But right now I have a fairly simple, one-table, db I am trying to get set up. I need to have a couple of fields with a single checkbox in them. When they are checked, then another field or fields would ungray and allow for entry. If they are not checked the additional fields would stay grayed-out. Does this make any sense?

Ex.: "Deceased" - if checked, then "Date" ungrays.

"Registered" - if checked, "Number" ungrays.

Then I also would need the opposite:

"U.S." - if checked, then 3 other fields don't allow entry. If not checked, then the Non-US fields allow entry.

With this one I was thinking I might be better having a yes and no option. Yes- grayed out, No- allow for entry in the other fields.

I have a data-entry layout basically designed. But the end-user would like these checkboxes - they believe it will make it simpler for the data entry person.

I've also got another question for which I've been searching the help files and manuals and they've been less than helpful. Can I have an "Email" field where an email is entered and it allows a user to click on the field/link and send an email to that address via their email program. I tried to look up hyperlinks with FM help and got no where.

Anyway, sorry this is so long, and for more than 1 question! Thanks for any help you can give me. Going to dinner, but I'll check back later tonight and then tomorrow. I really appreciate all the great info on this forum.

SLYCV :))

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad you finaly desided to take the plunge into relational approaches. Only problem here is what you discripe here not nessersarily fall under the visibility trick as I thought.

What you can do is that the gray part is the aligned to the left and the inside to portal is aligned to the right. These two labels are placed ontop of each other, but where the gray of them is offset to be a pix or so outside the invisible portal.

But the question is if this really is particular efficient seen from a developers point of view, when you can have mergefield change attributes to the beat of a different drum via:

http://www.filemaker.com/help/FunctionsRef-389.html

So my suggestion goes; utilize mergefields as field lables, and if the field really should dissapear use the visibility trick.

If we perspectivate this, is there a price to pay if a userinterface is too homebrewed and neglecting established guidelines.

If our aim is to confuse people the most conning most innocent users into a belief that developers as are gods gift to humanity and who really needs to be regarded with appropriate dignity ... only thing is that I do not subscripe to such an attitude!

I believe that the users are more inclined to value of the actual use of a tool, than the shenanigans you're able to whip up, please find another tool if you're into empty self promotions.

Eventhough you're on windows might the issues brought up here:

http://developer.apple.com/documentation/UserExperience/Conceptual/OSXHIGuidelines/index.html

...make you think of when to reinvent the userinterfaces or the wheel for that matter.

--sd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a question about the visibility trick. I have a set of radio buttons that makes certain fields appear or disappear. However, the fields don't become visible until after I tab out of the radio buttons. Is there any way I can make them appear as soon as the radio button is checked?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filemakers modality is different, since several users in a networked solution can be in the same record is a cursor in a field the key to the record locking ...clicking outside relevieves you from the burden of ownership.

But you can place an invicible button hovering over each instance that toggles the value of the ....well you write radio button why? Checkboxes allows you to select several while a radio swiches among a series and allow only one to hold a value.

This means that you need a script called from each location's invisible button. Here could the same script do, using the scriptparamter to get the value:

Set Field [ Untitled::aRadioSet; Get ( ScriptParameter ) ]

Obviously are radiobutton fields easiest to deal with, however if you when it comes to it, need a set of checkboxes instead is still posible with a one liner with the scriptparamter, but you would need to use this custom functions to both switch on and off each of the x'es in the array.

http://www.briandunning.com/cf/39

Where the scriptparamter goes into the second parameter of Rays CF.

--sd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is 6161 days old. Please don't post here. Open a new topic instead.

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
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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