AndrewFry
Qrew Assistant Captain
Joined 6 years ago
User Profile
User Widgets
Contributions
Application Token
I have a button that allows me to input the date and username of the person using the button. In previous versions of the app, the "Require Application Tokens" was unchecked, however, for the added security that it provides, we are going to start using it. The issue I am having is that now when the button is clicked, it gives an API_Edit_Record error due to no associated app token. I have gone into the App Properties, Manage Application Token, and Created a New Application Token. Afterward, I edited the button's code and added the following to the end: & "apptoken=xxxxxxxxxxxx", with xxxxxxxxxx being the actual token id. But I still get the same error. I have a few other buttons I need to do this to, so I would like to get it correct. The full button code is: URLRoot() & "db/" & Dbid() & "?act=API_EDITRecord&rid=" & [Assignment_ID_#] & "&_fid_23=" & Now() & "&_fid_24=" & UserToName(User(), "FF") & "&_fid_34=" & "1" & "apptoken=TokenCodeHere" & "&disprec=1" What am I missing? Do I perhaps have the apptoken line in an incorrect sequence? Should it be directly after the 2nd line? Any thoughts/input is appreciated. Thank you!! ------------------------------ Andrew ------------------------------Re: Updating App - Suggestions on table/form design best practice?
Mark, thanks for the response. Yes, there are 8 slots in the Work order, each one is identified as representing one of the 8 different contact types. I first select my client, then I can click the dropdown which represents the VP, and it will only show me contacts from that client that have a contact type of VP. The same goes for the other 7 contact types, only showing me those specific contacts that are of that type and for that client. As far as sending emails, I am not too concerned about that issue as the contacts themselves would not be receiving any emails. Although I do like the simplicity which the brute force way of doing it allots me ... any pros to doing a m:m vs. this brute force method? Thanks again! ------------------------------ Andrew ------------------------------Updating App - Suggestions on table/form design best practice?
I am updating an app I previously created and trying to implement some better "best practices". One of the areas I am focusing on is better use of intermediate tables, aka Many-to-Many. My previous app had a part of it set up as follows: Tables Work Orders Clients Contacts Relationships Clients < Contacts Clients < Work Orders Contacts < Work Orders (x8) In my contacts table, there are several different types of contacts, e.g. VP, AVP, Supervisor, Manager, Specialist, etc. In the main Work Orders form, I have 8 drop downs, each stemming from one of the 8 Contacts<Work Orders relationships, and each representing one of the different contact types. Each dropdown is conditionally reliant upon the client selected in the Work Orders form. I was curious if there was a better way to do this, perhaps using a M:M relationship, maybe a table between Contacts and Work Orders, .... however thinking through this, I would still need to have 8 dropdowns, one for each contact type .... would it really add any benefit using a M:M table in that scenario, or should I leave it as I previously had it ???? Thanks for your input and suggestions ... I appreciate them ... ------------------------------ Andrew ------------------------------Re: Closing the field space
In my prior app, I do have some fields above the "TYPE" field that are hidden until the record is created. But everything else is the same as far as the layout. Here is a screenshot of my updated app I am having the issue with. As you can see, there isn't anything between the various fields. Here is a screenshot of my prior app that is set up visually the way I like it. I don't have the additional fields in my updated app because I haven't created those relationships just yet. Could that be the issue? ------------------------------ Andrew ------------------------------Closing the field space
I have an app where the space between fields is closed, meaning there is not any large amounts of space between them. Example: However, in making a similar app with similar fields, I cannot seem to remove the extra space between the fields. Example (I have encircled in red the extra space): I cannot figure out how I did it before and why I cannot do it now. Also, the Rich Text box is not expanding to fit below the three upper fields. What am I missing? I feel like it is something super obvious but I can not place my finger on it ... ------------------------------ Andrew ------------------------------Re: Setting up Notes
What I ended up doing is the following: In the Notes Table, the Related NTS field, I enabled the Conditional Values checkbox. Here is what I set: I changed the NTS Default Record Picker to the following: In the Notes form, I inserted the following field: NTS - Note Subjects_Subject, and set it to use the Default Record Picker. Now in the Notes form, I have the Type field, which is the drop down menu and lists out all the Types, and the Subject field, which is a drop down menu and lists out all the Subjects. However, the Subjects is conditional to the Type selected. It also lists the text of the Subject instead of a numerical value. Not sure if what I did and how I set it up is best practice, which is what I am aiming for ... ------------------------------ Andrew ------------------------------
