PDF Printing

[noiseordinance]

Ok, I'm not super Filemaker savvy so forgive me if this is a dumb question. If I search for a record in Filemaker and it pulls up 7 records, and I need record 6 of 7 and I attempt to save that record as a .pdf (File > Save/Send Records As > pdf) it converts record 1 instead of record 6. Is there anything we can do to fix this? It does it on all workstations.

Thanks!

[Fitch]

Did you choose the "current record" option in the save dialog? Are you looking at a form or a list view?

[stefangs]

either turn on the 'current record' option in the print dialog or omit the record(s) you don't want to print with cmd-T.

[noiseordinance]

So CMD+T narrows it down to only the visible record? Is that correct? Also, what would the Windows equivalent to that command be? Thanks a ton for the help...

[noiseordinance]

Also, if I understand correctly, the cmd button is the open apple, yes? I'm not too Mac savvy. When we hit open-apple+T, it omits only the visible record...

[mr_vodka]

No Cmd-T or Ctrl-T is the keyboard shortcut to omit the current record. You can also omit multiple records.

You can print just the current record as Tom said.

* Edit P.S. I would LOVE a isolate record step...

Edited June 10, 2008 by Guest
Added PS

[noiseordinance]

Okay, sorry, you'll have to excuse me, I'm a little out of it this morning. You were saying to omit records with the cmd-T button. So, since a searchcan often pull up many results, what is the other method you mentioned? You were talking about something in the print dialogue...

Thanks again

[Fenton]

Somewhere in the print dialog (different for Mac and Windows, may be tab/submenu) are "FileMaker" options. There is "Records being browsed" and "Current record"; you want the later.

[Vaughan]

The way to "select" the current record is:

Show All Records

Omit Record

Show Only Omitted

[LaRetta]

Hi there, Vaughan!!

I see this suggested time and again on FM Forums and Cafe'. But it can break in multi-user if another User creates a new record after the Omit Record and before the Show Omitted Only. Rare, one might say? Not really, if there are many Users creating continual new records. And if it breaks, it can be very bad.

It has been discussed in great length and I believe the best script to use would be one which tested for only one record before continuing. Here is one by -Queue- which fits the requirement quite nicely, I think:

Freeze Window

Show All Records

Omit Record

Show Omitted Only

Loop

Exit Loop If [ Get ( FoundCount ) = 1

Go To Record/Request/Page [ Last ]

Omit Record

End Loop

UPDATE: Upon re-read of the entire thread, printing 'current record' seems more straightforward!

LaRetta

Edited June 11, 2008 by Guest
Added update

[Vaughan]

"UPDATE: Upon re-read of the entire thread, printing 'current record' seems more straightforward!"

Yes it does, but there is still the problem that preview mode shows all records in the current found set.

Thanks LaRetta (and ~Queue~) for the tip. Gotta watch those multi-user gotchas!

[Fitch]

Let's be clear: the question was not about printing, it was about Save/Send Records As PDF.

If for some reason the "current record" option is not sufficient and you do want to isolate one record, the way I generally do it is to simply search on the ID field (assuming you have one - if not, you should). This can be scripted like so:

Set Variable( $id ; ID )

Enter Find Mode

Set Field( ID ; $id )

Perform Find

I'm not clear on whether you need to retain your original found set here. If so, let us know.

[Wickerman]

For most of my own databases, I find it very handy to put a simple little checkbox or radio button field somewhere on the layout that I call "Tag". When I find myself browsing around for certain records I want to do something with (like printing an odd group of mailing labels) I click the Tag button and then just do a find for them when I'm ready. Then I clear the Tag field by doing an empty global replace when I'm done. (Or have a little "clear tag" button next to it). Works for a single record too. I know that doesn't help with the scripting scenarios but is real handy in day-to-day use.

Wickerman

[Vaughan]

"For most of my own databases, I find it very handy to put a simple little checkbox or radio button field somewhere on the layout that I call "Tag". When I find myself browsing around for certain records I want to do something with (like printing an odd group of mailing labels) I click the Tag button and then just do a find for them when I'm ready. Then I clear the Tag field by doing an empty global replace when I'm done."

Think about how this will work in a multiple-user scenario, when more one user is "tagging" the records while another is simultaneously clearing the tag field...

... and compare it with a process whereby the records are "marked" by putting their record ids, paragraph-delimited, into a global field and using a self-join relationship to "find" them again with the GTRR script step.

[LaRetta]

...and you do want to isolate one record, the way I generally do it is to simply search on the ID field

Why would you bother searching for a record you have already found, Tom? You are sitting on the one you want; a search again for it, simply to isolate it in a found set seems a waste of time particularly as the number of records grows. Isolating one record out of many is rather easy and very fast.

But you bring up a point. The omit record method will not work if you want to preserve your found set. So you would want to open a new window and run the script from there. Then just close the window when done and you will again have your original found set.

LaRetta

Edited June 13, 2008 by Guest
Added sentence

[Fitch]

Isolating one record out of many is rather easy and very fast.

Yes, it is.