4 Replies Latest reply on Mar 29, 2013 4:24 PM by BillPlunkett

    Filtered portal based on layout table



      Filtered portal based on layout table


           Based on the great suggestions and help I get here, I am getting very close to what I need.  

           I have a layout based on a Contacts tables.  There is a portal based on a copy of the contacts table with a relationship established.  I can single click on a contact in the portal and it appropriately displays the corresponding detail on the layout.  So far so good.

           Now if I perform a find for one of the checkboxes listed on the right hand side (see image) I get an approriate subset of records that I can browse through on the layout except I don't know how to make the portal display the filetered set of rows - it displays the complete list.  How do I make the copy table display the same filtered records that the layout does?

           thanks once again in advance,  Bill


        • 1. Re: Filtered portal based on layout table

               I'd consider making that set of checkboxes a single field with a group of checkboxes. That way, the return separated list of of values this creates can be part of either your portal filter expression or the relationship.

               I'd need to know the details of your current setup for the portal--is it simply based on the X operator? and any existing filter expressions (how do you use "ClientSEarch"?) before I can be more specific here.

               What field(s) do you search when you perform your find after selecting one or more check boxes?


          • 2. Re: Filtered portal based on layout table

                 I am just very used to working with boolean fields that can be checked as simply yes or no.  To me, that seems easier and more straight forward than puting all the possibilites into on field that has to be parsed.

                 The portal is based on the logical copy of the Client table (the Layout is Client 1, and the portal is Client 2).  The tables are linked simply on the Client ID using the X operator.  The portal has no filtering turned on.

                 I performed the find by simply click the find button and then clicking only 1 checkbox.  The record set in Client 1 (Layout) worked fine, it's just that the portal record set doesn't follow suit and displays all contacts in the table.  It would be nice to be able to click say the "vendor" checkbox and then have the list of all the vendors in the table be displayed in the portal.

                 Please understand, I'm not saying that something isn't working -I'm just saying I don't know how to set up what I want to do.

                 thanks for your help,

            • 3. Re: Filtered portal based on layout table

                   Often, separate fields, or even separate related records is the way to go, but return separated lists have special properties in FileMaker that can sometimes be exploited to provide exactly what is needed.

                   If the set of checkboxes you have set up as individual fields was instead a single text field with a group of checkboxes, you could use this relationship:

                   Contacts::CheckBoxField = Contacts 2::CheckBoxField

                   Then the records that would appear in the portal would be all contacts records that have at least one selected checkbox the same as your current record.

                   If you define a text field, with global storage and the same checkbox group format, you could modify the relationship to be:

                   Contacts::GlobalCheckBoxField = Contacts 2::CheckBoxField

                   Then selecting check box values in GlobalCheckBoxField will automatically filter the portal and a script can use Go To Related Records to bring up the same set of matching records as your found set.

                   This is not the only possible way to do this, but this is why I was suggesting that a single field formatted with check boxes might be a better way to go.

              • 4. Re: Filtered portal based on layout table

                     I'll sure give it a try....

                     thanks again,