1 of 1 people found this helpful
If you were to move those two container fields into a separate table linked in a relationship to the original table, you can then set up record level locking on the record. This does not necessarily require a major redesign of your layout, just a case of repointing the container fields to the new table.
Otherwise you are looking at using scripts and layout design options to try to control access which can be problematic. You can use one layout that permits access and another that does not and switch layouts. Or you might stack two copies of the same field object, one that permits access and one that does not and use Hide Object When to control which copy of the field is visible on a given record.
use two container fields one on top of he other.. set one to be accessible in browse mode in inspector and the other not acessible. hide the one that is enabled for entry in browse mode with the hide object when calculation in the inspectpor
I really like this idea and am embarrassed that I didn't think of it myself. Prior to reading this, I saw that there's a way to simulate locking of a field by using an extra binary type field "is_locked" , then setting it to 1 when a pdf is dropped into the container. For the locking simulation you can utilize a validation calculation. It's a little weird, but it works.
However, I really like the idea of dropping those containers into their own table, that way I can easily use Manage>Security and the privilege sets to control when it's locked.
The main general issue with validation calculations is that they allow the user to transgress the validation rule and then toss up an error message. I prefer to steer them away from making the error in the first place--leaving validation rules in place as "insurance" just in case my interface design has a "loophole" that I didn't allow for.
Here's a potential option!
- Create the same container twice.
- The rearward container will have browse tick box OFF
- The forward container will have browse tick box ON
- The forward container should be set to Hide when the Container field calculation is > "0"
In this way the the same field is displayed twice, but once its occupied by a file the "browsable" container will be hidden revealing the "unbrowsable" container field.
Hope this helps! Let me know if it makes sense!
/// RAY LAND /// @ITSRAYLAND /// C 386.362.9312 /// O 866.352.7295