Reading and writing to cels in a xls can be handled by the 360Works Scribe plugin, but you are better off if you can do all in FM,
saves you a lot off hassle handling the xls in the first place.
Hope this helps,
Ruben van den Boogaard
Ruud Bouman - van de Vijver wrote:
re-engineer their administration. To advise them whether to develop all workflow supporting documents and forms in FileMaker, I am investigating possible solutions by integrating their current (mainly xls) files in a FileMaker solution.
If your task is to re-engineer their administration, why are you starting by redeploying what they already had. Surely with info going forward you should be doing it with FileMaker whereever possible...
Sure, there are reasons for using separately editable custom documents and calculations... but I would first be asking myself if there was an appropriate line to draw under the 'old way' and introduce a 'new way' with FileMaker producing the documentation dynamically and editable by all who are assigned the right privileges. Dynamically you could produce your PDF on the fly as a downloadable or email attachment with a bit of PHP or with IWP and Remote Scripter from 360Works.
just something to consider... I really don't expect that a lot of documents can be easily replaced by FM... but you may be surprised.
I could not agree more, changing for the better usually involves change
It is just impossible - to much of a time consuming task with to much operational risk - to switch everything to FileMaker turn-key. They already have their customer and asset administration in FileMaker now. Next steps are the statements of work and connected invoicing for the repair shop, on-site service and maintenance, winter storage, insured damage repairs and incidental service and maintenance requests.
Still, I am convinced that all of these processes can be supported in FileMaker and - by embedding them in FileMaker - will make all these processes more efficient along the way because of the value / features of FileMaker. The question is more or less to provide an intermediate solution for the meantime...
Reconsidering the approach - either leave the processes "as-is" or " re-engineer" them to be supported 100% by FileMaker - seems to be the only reasonable choice, indeed. Thank you for your thoughts and recommendations.
Thx. Ik was er al bang voor, dat wordt toch nog bedelen voor budget
Een kind met een waterhoofd is veel duurder :-) Mogelijk kun je het proces voor proces doen, zodat de
investering gespreid kan worden en je het in een keer goed kan opzetten.