Log in to create and rate content, and to follow, bookmark, and share content with other members. Not a member? Join Now!

AnsweredAssumed Answered

Portal Filtering Question

Question asked by Slumberjack on Apr 3, 2018
Latest reply on Apr 3, 2018 by Slumberjack

Like • Show 0 Likes0
Comment • 8

I have three tables with various sets of data. Members, roles and member roles.

Members - A row for each member with their name and a UUID ID

Roles - Possible roles with a name and UUID ID

Member Roles - Table with a row for each occurence of a role for each member.

For example, there may be 100 occurences of the same role in this table each tied to a different member.

I'm trying to build a portal that displays records in the roles table that the member in focus doesn't have already assigned.

I have a relationship from member roles to roles. It is mem_role::role_id = mem::role_id AND mem_role::mem_id_g (Global that I set on layout enter) = role::role_id

This doesn't seem to be working the way I need it to and I haven't found anything similar online yet. Does anyone have any ideas for how to set this up either through relationships or filtering?

erolst Apr 3, 2018 11:49 AM

Correct Answer

Find attached a quick'n'dirty sample file that demonstrates one way to do it.

See the reply in context

No one else had this question

Outcomes

8 Replies

philmodjunk Apr 3, 2018 9:00 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
There are a number of possible options. Presumably, you have these relationships and table occurrence "boxes":

Members---<Member_Roles>-----Roles
Match fields:
Members::MemberID = Member_Roles::MemberID
Roles::RoleID = Member_Roles::RoleID
(Your names for fields and table occurrences may be slightly different than what I show here.)

To do exactly what you describe, you might add an unstored calculation field, cSelectedRoles, to Members:
List ( List ( Member_Roles::RoleID ) ; - 1 ) //clear the "do not evaluate if all referenced fields are empty check box

You can then make a second occurrence of Roles, name it Roles|Unselected and set up these match fields and operator:
Members::cSelectedRoles <> Roles|Unselected::RoleID (Use the "not equals operator where I typed in <>.)

There are also ways to set up a "dwindling value list" of roles that automatically updates to omit roles already selected and you can list the all the roles in what looks and acts like a set of check boxes, but where clicking to select a role performs a script to create the needed record in Member_Roles and clicking again to clear the selection deletes the record from Member_Roles.

If either such method interests you, let me know and I'll post links to some teaching files that have documented working examples of these techniques.
1 person found this helpful
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
erolst Apr 3, 2018 9:03 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Assuming you create a new relationship from Member to Roles, using the Cartesian operator to match any two fields, you can filter a portal into that relationship to only show not-yet assigned roles with

IsEmpty (
FilterValues (
Roles_Cartesian::id ;
List ( MemberRoles::id_role )
)
)
1 person found this helpful
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
Slumberjack @ philmodjunk on Apr 3, 2018 9:42 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Phil, I tried your solution, but it ended up returning (somehow all member_role_ids rather than a list of role ids for the given member. I am not sure if your dwindling value list would work well for this application. I am looking to have this utility act much like a sort selection screen or import/export selection screen with a list of available unassigned roles on the left and the roles already assigned to the given member on the right. With a button on each portal role that I will script to create a new member role and refresh the portals so the role will no longer display on the left but will show on the right. If you have working examples of a tool like that, it would be very appreciated.
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
Slumberjack @ erolst on Apr 3, 2018 9:44 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
I can't seem to get this solution working either. I imagine its user error, but it just returns an empty portal because it returns a list of all idroles in the member role table. So, for a brand new member with no roles, it displays everything on the left but anyone who has an entry in member roles doesn't display on the left.
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
philmodjunk Apr 3, 2018 9:47 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Then I suggest that you share the details of how you implemented my suggestion. Sounds like some detail is not set up correctly. If you are getting member_role IDs, which are not present in Roles, it sounds like you linked to an occurrence of Member Roles instead of an added occurrence of Roles.

Frankly, assuming that you don't have a huge number of roles from which to select, the check box format that I suggested would be simpler and take up a smaller portion of your layout than what you have in mind. But it's your solution to design as you see fit and my suggestions are based only on what little I know about your solution--which is only what you tell me in this specific discussion.
1 person found this helpful
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
philmodjunk Apr 3, 2018 9:49 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Also keep in mind what I said about "there are many ways to do this".

There is certainly nothing wrong about erolst's suggested approach and if you find it simpler to implement, by all means use it.
1 person found this helpful
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
erolst @ Slumberjack on Apr 3, 2018 11:49 AM
Unmark Correct
Correct Answer
Find attached a quick'n'dirty sample file that demonstrates one way to do it.
Attachments
- MemberRoles_eos.fmp12.zip73.7 KB
2 people found this helpful
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
Slumberjack Apr 3, 2018 2:43 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
erolst philmodjunk
Thank you both, I finally was able to get it to work using the example Erolst provided. The trick I had to find was to use the correct table occurrence to view the unassigned tasks. I have a very complex relationship, and I was using the right table but wrong occurrence. You guys both rock. Thank you!
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions

Portal Filtering Question

Outcomes

Attachments

Related Content

Recommended Content