Multiple choices / A question or two as well.

[Mike CPB]

Task / Call Log Report List.

I've created drop-down value lists for filtering purposes. So far so good.

For now it will show records by the choice made which is great. Wondering if extending the found set through the drop-down field choice is possible. ( maybe with a modifyer key? )

Is there a way to allow a second choice (thrid or foruth etc.)either in the same drop-down value list or another to the displayed records.

Also, is it possible for a value list to find empty records?

Regads, Mike.

[Mike CPB]

Well it's not quite what I had in mind but adding extend found set to my script [=] does add empty records to the found set. Copromize, but better than nothing.

Still puzzled on multiple choice's.

Regards, Mike.

[Vaughan]

Not sure what you want to do.

You use the term "extend" so I assume that you want to select more records... this is done with multiple find requests.

Say you want to find calls for "network" or "software" or "hardware" then you'll need to create three find requests, one for each category.

Most people don't understand this so a useful interface is to provide a global field with checkboxes that allow the selection of the categories. When performing the find, a script parses the global field and creates a separate request for each value (they are paragraph delimited).

[Mike CPB]

In simplest terms I would like to perform a find/ multiple find request. Based on multiple choices in either the same field or another.

I'm wondering is there a way to display and choose items from the value lists for the find?

Maybe this is what you are suggesting "global field with checkboxes" but I'm not sure where to begin.

Regards, Mike.

[Vaughan]

What you ask for is quite complicated.

Start with learning how checkboxes work, and then how FMP does finds.

Checkboxes are just a nice way of entering multiple paragraph-delimited values into a field. Each time a checkbox option is selected, FMP adds a paragraph to the bottom of the existing values and then inserts the selected values. So the field ends up with a list of values, separated by paragraphs.

FMP performs find my latching whatever is typed into the field with the values in all the records. So if you have a city field and type "new" it will find "New York" and "Newtown" and any other value with "new" in it somewhere.

If you enter "New York :paragraph: Newtown" into the field, then that's exactly what it will search for: a record that has all that in it. FMP does not separate out multiple values automagically, because it has no way to know that they are separate values.

What *you* have to do is to create a script that splits out the multiple values and enters them into separate find requests. Then make sure that this script gets run each time the user's perform a find in this table.

It gets very complicated.

If you're going to be searching for multiple values in multiple fields simultaneously then the situation becomes even more complex. At this stage I'd be moving to a filtered portal approach (look that one up in the Forums) and forgetting about using a find.

BTW to confuse matters even more, multiple values in a field (ie checkboxes) are *not* a good way to store data. Each field should only contain one value at a time. This is called "normalisation" and it's worth reading up about if you're serious about doing databases that work right.

[Mike CPB]

I appreciate the time and energy you've spent doing your best to put into terms that might be best understood. I guess what I'm asking for is complicated...

I have built my filemaker database without ever once going into find mode.

I've used the "spotlight" technique which suits my needs and seems logical.

Link

Personally I find the find mode complicated. I understand why and how it is used. After watching a flash video showcasing the ability to add find request on the fly is what this topic was all about.

After thinking about it, I've come to believe that I probably won't need to do multiple find too often. If there is specific things I need to see then scripting find/expand found set is my compromise.

Better than nothing.

Once again thanks.

Regards Mike.