I manage a database shared by a dozen or so users in a real estate
business. They go in and out of the office frequently, and often leave
their cursor in one field or another. This is a problem, as other users
and scripts sometimes need to edit that record. Is it possible to allow
several users to edit a record, so long as they don't enter the same
field? Alternatively, can records be automatically committed after a
period of inactivity?

Running FMP 8.5

In article <180320072336444464%smailliw_marva (AT) reverse (DOT) verizon.net>,
Lyndon <smailliw_marva (AT) reverse (DOT) verizon.net> wrote:

You can set it so that they automatically time out after a period of
inactivity.

Really, though, it sounds like a training issue.

--
For email, change <fake> to <earthlink>
Bill Collins

On Mar 18, 9:36 pm, Lyndon <smailliw_ma... (AT) reverse (DOT) verizon.net> wrote:
Ugh. I hate this.

I thought up a solution, but have never tried it and that's the Troi
Activator plug in which allows you to trigger scripts (ie, Commit
Record) on other computers.

G

On 03/19/2007 13:25:06 "Grip" <grip (AT) cybermesa (DOT) com> wrote:

From experience, Activator is pretty slick in what it does, but setting up a scenario as you describe can get involved, not to mention expensive for a site license.

Is it the cost, or the use of a plug you hate?

If the former, try zippScript http://homepage.mac.com/jkornhaus/filemaker/

It's free.

If the latter, all I can say is, if you have to use one, you may as well not have to pay for it.

Very simple to have it Commit Records every so often. You can have it operating on each computer, rather than triggering remotely.

There is an example of how to use zippScript to trigger future events at
http://www.VirtualVermont.com/FMP.

Matt

I never give access to a user of the 'real' record, but instead I offer him
a layout full of globals mimicking the names of the actual fields, I name
this layout 'proposal for editing' - and a warning says that at this stage
the actual record is not yet modified (or created) - then a button 'Apply'
or 'Make actual modifications' launches a script that verify first the
consistency of some of the modifications, then I do them on the real record.
Before that I ask him again with globals what record is to be changed and I
copy all real fields contents to the globals that are the ones to be shown.
As a side remark, such a layout can belong to any table, as 'globals' are
'local' ie pertain to that user only.
Remi-Noel


"Lyndon" <smailliw_marva (AT) reverse (DOT) verizon.net> a écrit dans le message de
news: 180320072336444464%smailliw_marva (AT) reverse (DOT) verizon.net...

Thanks for all your responses. It is fundamentally a user problem, but
in this case idiot-proofing the database is the easiest solution.

In article <190320071724343387%smailliw_marva (AT) reverse (DOT) verizon.net>,
Lyndon <smailliw_marva (AT) reverse (DOT) verizon.net> wrote:

Hiring people who aren't "idiots" might be a better solution. ;o)

Helpful Harry
Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)

"Helpful Harry" <helpful_harry (AT) nom (DOT) de.plume.com> a écrit dans le message de
news: 200320071245562275%helpful_harry (AT) nom (DOT) de.plume.com...
I don't agree (despite your ';o').
You never know by whom, as the time goes, your base will be used. It could
well be a temporary guy who never saw your base before but who is asked to
run it, while he is not an 'idiot' in general, but yes he somewhat 'is' in
front of an unknown database.
For example, the 'Find mode' is something really odd for the average person.
He may well modify real records. A special 'Find' layout with globals or a
message to be completed, are, in my opinion, better.
Remi-Noel

On 03/19/2007 17:24:34 Lyndon <smailliw_marva (AT) reverse (DOT) verizon.net> wrote:

I believe it was Mark Twain who said something to the effect of

"You can't make anything foolproof, because fools are so ingenious."

For twenty years, I worked with a person a living confirmation of that statement. No matter what I did, she found a way to muck it up. Totally innocent in intent, but also totally clueless.

Matt

On Mar 19, 3:24 pm, Lyndon <smailliw_ma... (AT) reverse (DOT) verizon.net> wrote:
I don't think this is a user problem. I think this comes up often
enough that Filemaker should create a solution. Remi uses an
effective solution, but I prefer being able to enter data 'live' as is
the case with most applications computer users interface with today,
though as time goes on...I'm leaning towards implementing the globals
idea. The plug in works too, but when a problem comes up often enough
to require a plugin the original app isnt doing it's job.

G