I have a drop down list of subjects. Two particular subjects are Mathematics and Additional Mathematics. When I choose Mathematics from the drop down list, records from Additional Mathematics and Mathematics are both displayed. Worse is that records from Additional Mathematics are shown first. Many colleagues made mistakes because of this.
How do I make the drop down list such that when clicked, the exact terms are used instead?
This is a problem that is not necessarily unique to FileMaker. You are searching for a name that is imprecise because it is a match for multiple names. Rather instead you might want to search for a unique key whose subject name is 'Mathematics' as displayed in your drop down. It is the use of that unique key that allows you to perform a precise search, even when the name of one subject is a partial or complete match for another.
This solution requires you to add a unique serial number which is, in your case, to alter the Subjects table and add a field called 'idnumber' or similar. The field type should be Number, and the options should include Auto-Enter-Serial number-Generate and On creation-increment by 1. The trick here lies in making sure no two subjects have the same 'idnumber' even when you aren't paying attention, so set the next value to something greater than the number of subjects that already exist. Then from another layout assign each existing subject a unique idnumber, noting that if there are a great many subjects you could script that step.
I should mention that many recommend a best practice of never changing a production layout, but rather to duplicate the layout and make the required changes to the duplicate. This minimizes the effects of testing your changes etc.
Finally, change your layout in inspector such that the drop down list shows Use values from field: 'idnumber'. Select Also display values from second field: 'Subject' and Show values only from second field. Now your drop down is the same clean selection as before. The field will not look correct yet because it will show a number. To make it look correct you can insert another field, selecting 'Subject'. Place that field over top of the 'idnumber' and send 'idnumber' to the back. Fill the 'Subject' field with the correct background solid color instead of none, and enjoy your new precision search capability! The entire process is handled server side so it should not matter that client access is IWP.
If you're using the selection to do a find, put an "==" before the text you're searching on. This will tell FileMaker to do an exact field contents search, instead of a "contains" search.
Related
I'm using Postgres to store formulae and elements of formulae across two tables. Basically, you have something like:
Elements Table
symbol
content
pi
3.1.45
lune
42
Formula Table
symbol
content
area
pi*r^2
rugsize
area*lune
So, formulae can use elements but also other formulae in their content field. For this reason (and for general reduction of confusion) I would like to make symbol unique across both tables.
I can, of course, in the code that's doing the insertion, look up the entries before adding them and refuse to add a duplicate symbol. (I probably will do this, but I don't want the database reliant on that.) I could also require a tag within the formula table to specify when it's using another formula:
symbol
content
rugsize
f(area)*lune
I'm not crazy about that since it puts a burden on the user to remember that, or on the coder to secretly add and remove the "f()".
Everything I found on Stack and elsewhere went the other way: Forcing a column value to be present in another table, except for one suggestion that the unique items be kept in a separate table.
symbol
area
lune
pi
rugsize
And then...actually, I'm still not sure how that would work at the DB level.
So, is there a way to do this with constraints or foreign keys, or must I write a trigger for each table to look into the other table?
Addition: I've simplified here greatly but the elements table is much more complex than I'm showing and has little in common with the formulae table.
Edited to add the above addition and to try to fix the one-column "symbol" table which looks fine in the editing preview but does not format correctly on the actual page.
I have a table in a word document that has three colums and all fields are mailmerge fields from an external IT system.
There are three columns displaying the fields:
Charge Description
Charge Value (£)
Eiligible? (yes/no)
I am trying to create a field that adds up all eligibale charges so that only charge values that show a "yes" in the eligigble field are included. Does anyone know if this is possible? I have tried creating a formula but can't get it to work. Also, I would assume at some point an if statment is required so that it only includes the eligible charge.
Has anyone done anything similar before and if so, would they mind sharing how it was achieved?
Many thanks
You can do some things with expression fields (created in Word with CTRL-F9). This will look like {} and you can insert the expression. eg {{MERGFIELD charge} + {MERGEFIELD charge2}}. Since however you want to check multiple values and then create an expression, its probably easier to use a macro. The macro would contain your logic, then set the fields in the document accordingly.
Here are two external links since I can't reproduce a useful amount the content here because it's a verbose answer to a potentially deep question:
Expression Fields
Merge fields
I hope that helps.
I have a table called transactions. Within that is a field called ipn_type. I would like to create separate table occurrences for the different ipn types I may have.
For example, one value for ipn_type is "dispute". In the past I would create a global field called "rel_dispute" and I would populate that with the value of "dispute". Then I could create a new table occurrence of the transactions table, and make a relationship based on transactions::ipn_type = transactions::rel_dispute. This way only the dispute records would show up in my new table occurrence.
Not long ago, somebody pointed out to me that this is no longer necessary, and there is a simpler way to setup such a relationship to create a new table occurrence. I can't for the life of me remember how that was done, though.
Any information on this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
To show a found set of only one type, you must either perform a find or use the Go to Related Record script step to show only related records. What you describe as your previous setup fits the latter.
The simpler way is to perform a find - either on demand, or by a script triggered OnLayoutEnter.
The new 'easy' way is probably:
using one base relationship only and
filtering only the displaying portal by type. This can be done with a global field, a global variable containing current display type. Multiple portals with different filter conditions are possible as well.
~jens
I'm operating in Word 2013 and 2010, so I can use code that works in either. I'm trying to create a word document to keep track of my recipes. At its most basic I want to have a TOC that updates based on headings. I also want it to have any category I want (eg: Appetizers, Drinks, Entrée, etc...) ordered alphabetically. Under each category I have tables. Each recipe gets a table that has it's name, directions, notes, tags, and potentially a picture. The second cell has another two column table inside of it that contains the quantity and name of each ingredient necessary for the recipe.
I have all of that so far and I'd like to automate adding new categories and recipes. Currently, I have to find the category, then scroll down to find where the name goes alphabetically and insert a quick table I made. I then fill in the info.
I'd like to be able to search the document for each category name, then insert the new category wherever it belongs, with a space before and after it. I found that my tables give me trouble if I don't have a space between everything. It tries to pull anything it's touching into the table and merge them.
I wanted to give the backstory, so you'd know where I was going to go eventually and could provide help that fits better with what I need. After I can add a new category, I plan to use vba to organize each table alphabetically by the name in the first cell of each table. It will also help when I start adding sorts to it. Eventually, I'd like to be able to sort it to say, only display recipes from a certain person, or display my frequently used recipes. I'd then have it either hide all the others or create a new doc with just these. So thanks for the help. Below I'll post the code I most recently tried. I tried a few other variations of this same code and keep getting an 'expected end of statement. I've gotten other errors when trying other variations of it, but this is the best I can come up with on my own.
Private Sub UserForm_Initialize()
For Each cat In ActiveDocument.Styles = "Heading 1"
lstCat.AddItem (cat)
Next
End Sub
I have a form called frmAddCategory I'm using as a test. I was going to have a listbox lstCat to show every category with the style heading 1. I have a textbox called txtAdd to type new ones and a cmdAdd button to add it to the form.
Edit: I've been playing around with my macro recorder after finding out about outline view mode. I set it to show only 'heading 1' level and selected the ones I wanted, not selecting the appendix or reference. Then I went to the home tab and sorted paragraph by ascending alphabetical order. I got some code I believe I can use to get it to run in VBA. However, it's not a complete fix as I don't want to select the last two with heading 1. It also works if I manually select the tables under each heading 1, but I can't set the spacing before and after. I'd like each heading and the tables under them to have a space or two between each for looks and editing purposes.
Also, if someone is going to give my question a negative rating, then please post a comment explaining. As far as I can tell from the faq about the forum and the other questions I've seen, it is a well posed question. A clear title, a good explanation of the problem, code examples, research. So if I am doing something wrong, please inform me, so that I can correct it.
first thanks for your bit about macro recorder and outline mode, I have been trying for long time to fill a list box with selection.text between two HeadingLevel(1) headings.
now to yours, sorry I can't think of way to do in word. BUT it would be real easy in Access. one table of categories like called tblCategories another for recipes tblRecipes. To make real easy, when the use autoID on ALL tables. But to avoid LOTS of headaches for tblRecipes rename its autoID to RecipesID same for other tables. in table of recipes you can use a memo field to hold large amount of data. the spot for text in Heading would be put in one field of the tblRecipes. once you have tables looking to have a field for each item you want to track. hit save, then use wizard to create a form based on table. repeat for all tables you want to have it real easy to put info into any table.
1.reportTOC based on query of Every Heading you want, can preview or print as want. reportByCategory and so on reports are sorted a to z unless you want to sort by Owner, then recipe all auto sorted a - z.
report wizard to get hard copy. if you want to sort real easy, built in. also if want to be able to pick all recipes for a holiday real easy, one table tblHolidays. one tblHolidayRecipes fields autoId (not used by you anywhere but needed), fldRecipesId (holds RecipesId) , fldHolidayId (holds HolidayId). the wizard will show how to get only what you want. in access 2013 you can include pix of food or.
I have a table like this:
Application,Program,UsedObject
It can have data like this:
A,P1,ZZ
A,P1,BB
A,P2,CC
B,F1,KK
I'd like to create a layout to show:
Application,# of Programs
A,2
B,1
The point is to count the distinct programs.
For the life of me I can't make this work in FileMaker. I've created a summary field to count programs resetting after each group, but because it doesn't eliminate the duplicate programs I get:
A,3
B,1
Any help much appreciated.
Create a a summary field as:
cntApplicaiton = Count of Application
Do this by going into define fields, create a field called cntApplication, type summary. In the options dialogue make the summary field a count on application
Now create a new layout with a subsummary part and nobody. The subsummary should be sorted on Application. Put the Application and cntApplication fields in subsummary. If you enter browse mode and sort by Application you ought to get the data you want.
You can also create a calc field with the formula
GetSummary(cntApplication; Application)
This will allow you to use the total number of Applications with in a record
Since I also generate the data in this form, the solution I've adopted is to fill two tables in FileMaker. One provides the summary view, the other the detailed view.
I think that your problem is down to dupliate records and an inadequate key.
Create a text field called "App_Prog". In the options box set it to an auto-enter calc, unchecking the 'Do not replace...' option, and use the following calc:
Application & "_" & Program
Now create a self join to the table using App_Prog as the field on both sides, and call this 'MatchingApps'.
Now, create (if you don't alread have one) a unique serial number field, 'Counter' say, and make sure that you enter a value in each record. (Find all, click in the field, and use serial number option in'Replace Field Contents...')
Now add a new calc field - Is_Duplicate with the following calc...
If (Counter = MatchingApps::Counter; "Master Record" ; "Duplicate")
Finally, find all, click in the 'Application field, and use 'Replace Field Contents...' with a calculation to force the auto-enter calc for 'App_Prog' to come up with a value.
Where does this get you? You should now have a set of records that are marker either "Master Record" or "Duplicate". Do a find on "Master Record", and then you can perform your summary (by Application) to do a count of distinct application-program pairs.
If you have access to custom functions (you need FileMaker Pro Advanced), I'd do it like this:
Add the RemoveDuplicates function as found here (this is a recursive function that takes a list of strings and returns a list of unique values).
In the relationships graph, add another occurrence of your table and add an Application = Application relationship.
Create a calculated field in the table with the calculation looking something like this:
ValueCount(RemoveDuplicates(List(TABLE2::Program)))
You'll find that each record will contain the number of distinct programs for the given application. Showing a summary for each application should be relatively trivial from here.
I think the best way to do this is to create a separate applications table. So as you've given the data, it would have two records, one for A and one for B.
So, with the addition of an Applications table and your existing table, which I'll call Objects, create a relationship from Applications to Objects (with a table occurrence called ObjectsParent) based on the ApplicationName as the match field. Create a self join relationship between Objects and itself with both Application and Program as the match fields. I'll call one of the "table occurrences" ObjectsParent and the other ObjectsChildren. Make sure that there's a primary key field in Objects that is set to auto-enter a serial number or some other method to ensure uniqueness. I'll call this ID.
So your relationship graph has three table occurrences:
Applications::Applicaiton = ObjectsParent::Application
ObjectsParent::Application = ObjectsChildren::Application, ObjectsParent::Program = ObjectsChildren::Program
Now create a calculation field in Objects, and calculating from the context of ObjectsParent, give it the following formula:
AppCount = Count( ObjectsChildren::ID )
Create a calculation field in Applications and calculating from the context of the table occurrence you used to relate it to ObjectsParent with the following formula:
AppCount = ObjectsParent::AppCount
The count field in Objects will have the same value for every object with the same application, so it doesn't matter which one you get this data from.
If you now view the data in Applications in list view, you can place the Applications::Application and Applications::AppCount fields on the layout and you should get what you've requested.