9 Replies Latest reply on Jun 19, 2017 4:55 PM by ezeitgeist

    Global checkbox? Possible?


      I am using globals in an Interface table for user login. My text boxes work, but for some reason a new checkbox I added (using a boolean for yes/no) cannot be clicked at all. Using it on Webdirect. Do checkboxes not work as globals when on an Interface area? Do I need to use radio button? I can get rid of it, if necessary, but like the feature I am adding.

        • 1. Re: Global checkbox? Possible?
          Markus Schneider

          a checkbox is a normal field - with the checkbox-option as an 'overlay'. Therefore a checkbox can be global as well


          It might be an 'interface-problem'

          - field 'locked' for entry in the inspector

          - field from a relationship that doesn't allow creation of records

          - 'misalignement' in webdirect (layout..), make the field bigger, test with a FileMaker client

          - etc

          • 2. Re: Global checkbox? Possible?

            In addition:


            In WebDirect, transparent objects placed so that they are on top of a field will block your mouse clicks where in FileMaker, the mouse click can still be used to enter the field.

            • 3. Re: Global checkbox? Possible?

              I'll go another route and suggest that you rethink your approach to user security especially where globals and table/fields are involved.

              Closing all the potential holes can become like a game of whack-a-mole.

              Not saying it should never be done.. just process with caution.

              • 4. Re: Global checkbox? Possible?

                I tested all the possible notes everyone responded with. It looks to be a permission thing somewhere -- all the text boxes work (I had 7 globals already and added one more text and the checkbox, the new text box works). I modified the size and that made it so when I was logged in with admin, I could check it on and off. BUT, not logged in, I cannot check it on and off.


                I'm not sure what permissions would be different for a checkbox than a text box. Both reside in my globals table. Both have the same globals setting.


                Where should I look? Also, the "locked" for entry in inspector, I do not believe it is, but where would that be exactly (the lock open and closed icon)?

                • 5. Re: Global checkbox? Possible?

                  The format will not change what permissions specified in the user's privilege set allows.


                  In the inspector, look on the behavior section of the data tab. If "Browse" is selected, then the field should allow browse mode access.


                  You might also see if the field object can be ungrouped on your layout.

                  • 6. Re: Global checkbox? Possible?

                    What web browser are you using?

                    • 7. Re: Global checkbox? Possible?

                      When you are "not logged in" how are you really logged in? Guest?

                      • 8. Re: Global checkbox? Possible?

                        Selected in browse is checked. Brought to front. Ungrouped, to the best of my knowledge. Checked via Chrome and Safari.


                        Something I just found: I usually hide the "1" of the Boolean value list from user view (so they just see the checkbox itself). I started to expand to see, and it turns out, when not logged in (I'm assuming logged in as Guest -- this part I did not code myself so I don't fully know where to look for how the initial step is logged in to get to the "login" splash screen), it does not read "1" instead the message next to the checkbox reads "<No Access>".


                        Could the "non-logged in" user [ie. maybe Guest] not have access to the Boolean value list and THAT be causing the access problem?

                        • 9. Re: Global checkbox? Possible?

                          I figured a workaround. I just changed it to a popover button instead of a checkbox and a hidden field. Works and looks prettier. Though, would love to figure this out at some point.