A Label Layout viewed in Preview Mode would be the simplest to create.
Yes, that's exactly what I want it to look like. Is there any way of achieving that effect or something similar but still allowing the user to interact with the check boxes?
You could have 4 portals displaying the records you want (by relationship) and have them start at record 1, 26, 51, 76.
The limitation is to build in the flexibility to the found set they display.
Interesting idea, Sorbsbuster.
I added a dummy ID field to the table and then created a dummy table with only an ID field. Setting all these fields to have the same value means I can base a layout on the dummy table but show records from my actual table in portals.
How do I build in the limitation you suggest? I can see why you want it, but the portal setup isn't letting me specify anything other than the fields.
The limitation is making it easy to display the found set you want at teh time. In list view presentation you will have access to all the complex FM search facilities to produce the found set to list.
If you can be reasonably restricted in your criteria for the found set you want to browse (I'm assuming it will grow to be more than 100 records) then you can set the portals up to be filtered portals (FM11 or 12). You can specify as many criteria as you want then, within the limits of performance acceptability, but with 100s of records as opposed to 100s of thousands it shouldn't ever be an issue.
Ah - there's the problem. I'm only on FM9.
I guess that means I'm stuck with a single column. Never mind - it's not that big a deal to scroll through a hundred or so records - maybe four screen fulls at a normal resolution.
Thanks, anyway. I learned a trick even if I can't use it this time.
Well, not really. You can use the global fields in the relationship. It's just a tad more awkward. (Note as well that you will be viewing this in form view, btw.)
Sorry. Which global fields and how would I use them?
It occurs to me that I could split the table into two and set up the dummy relationship to both tables - then I could base one portal on one table and one on the other.
I'm not sure I can be bothered with the work to do that or the lack of transparency when, in a year or so, I come back to look at it and wonder what the heck I was doing...
This shows you the general principle I was suggesting. It is easier in FM 11 because portal filters let you effectively use blanks in the filter.
You can type the first 4 letters of the name and the portal will reduce. You can show males, female, or all. You can limit by age, or show all.
I only showed one portal, but I don't think it matters. The limitation is that you will have to be specific about the potential 'search' criteria.
Oh. That's clever.
Thanks for the example - I think I can see how to adapt it. My situation is actually simpler than that one.
Thanks for the advice,