Jump to content

Display Records in Portal with Instance of Same Name


This topic is 2932 days old. Please don't post here. Open a new topic instead.

Recommended Posts

I have a table that has a "name_field". This table will have records where the "name_field" will contain the same value (name) as other records in the table.


I would like to use a portal to display all records where the "name_field" contains the same value (name).


I thought a self-relationship joined at the "name_field" would do the trick, but, it only shows a same value (name) when you are on a particular record. I understand this. What I don't understand is how to get the portal to show ALL records of the same name, regardless of which current record I am on.


Thanks in advance.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Comment,


Example records in table:

Record 1: Product Classification — Version 032

Record 2: Product Classification — Version 006


Example fields in the table (pertinent to the question):

Field1: Scheme Name:

Field 2: Scheme Version:


"Product Classification" is the Scheme Name; "Version 032" is the Scheme Version.


I must allow a Scheme Name to be the same as another Scheme Name. The manner in which the two are distinguished is through the "Scheme Version" field. I take those two fields and concatenate them for display purposes - but that is beside the issue at hand.


I would like a portal on the same layout based on the table "Scheme", where I can see all "Schemes" that have the same "Scheme Name". This allows me to view the different versions.


A similar issue exists with people's names in a large data set: "Robert Smith" may be the name of multiple individuals (instances).


I hope that helps explain what I am trying to achieve.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ugh! I suspected there was some other issue underlying my problem.


I am assuming that if I made the Scheme Version table, then to display the Scheme Versions that have the same Scheme Name… it becomes a simple matter of displaying a portal of the Scheme Version table on my Scheme layout.


Which leads me to suspect that ALL of my current related child tables of Scheme (a good half-dozen) will require a retrofit.


Are my assumptions correct?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

David, we seem to have a break in communications here - over plain English, not over DB or Filemaker terms. I am still unable to understand your goal. A portal to the Versions table, placed on a layout of Schemes, will show the Versions that are linked to the currently viewed record in Schemes (not the same name as the current scheme, because - hopefully- this name is recorded once only in the Schemes table).


Using your current structure, a portal based on a self-join relationship of the one table, matching on SchemeName, will also show all the versions that are linked to the currently viewed record - but you said that's not what you want, so ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Michael,


My bad: the communication problem is mine. I am trying to build a classification application. This application needs to be able to manage all of the Categories, the Category Types in which Categories belong to, the way the Categories Rollup and the way the Category Types Rollup in a hierarchical manner. These would be all bound together in a particular Scheme. So far, I have a prototype that seems to be coming together reasonably well. The more I work with it, the more it is coming together, but it is a slow road. Two things are becoming more clear as I progress:


1) Creating VERSIONS of a scheme are needed. This was not clear to me until the discussion with you as shown above.


2) In the real world, "Classification Schemes" do not necessarily conform to a rigid structure throughout. An example of this is "Bacteria". "Bacteria" is considered a member of both a "Domain" and a "Kingdom".


This translates into my data model as such (Bold all cap words are tables):

CATEGORY: Bacteria  (a member of)  CATEGORY TYPE: Domain

CATEGORY: Bacteria  (a member of)  CATEGORY TYPE: Kingdom


Not to speak in DB or FileMaker terms, but the above indicates that a Category like "Bacteria" is considered to be a member of two different Category Types: "Domain" and Kingdom". This is infrequent, but the issue arises and creates, in essence, two records that have the same name.


A good example of what I am trying to build would an application that would replicate the Biological Classification as shown here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_classification


I consider it to be a "Scheme" with a "Scheme Name" of: Biological Classification Scheme.


I have attached a quick diagram (with sample records) of what I have built so far. What is not in the diagram - is VERSIONS. Anyways, maybe the diagram can more clearly show what I have so far. 






Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, that's some expansion of the question ... I am not sure I am willing to follow you to where you have taken this.


I will say this, though: duplicating records is not an option.  If the same CATEGORY ("Bacteria") can be a member of two CATEGORY TYPEs ("Domain" and "Kingdom") then you have a many-to-many relationship - which means you either use a join table or hack it by using a multi-key field.


Note that I emphasized "same", because a classification scheme can easily have duplicate names for different categories at different levels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is 2932 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.