Hello Team,
I have build an editable grind and now I want to save the values inside my records. I have record table and rule input in my interface the problem is how I can save this data for each request I have. The data is a sample there are around 15 rows which I want the user to be able to save some of them can be null some of them can be filled out. Basically the property is read only, once user enter value we can use a!save to save the property for the respective row, but I always get cannot index rule input records..
rows: { a!gridRowLayout( contents: { a!richTextDisplayField( labelPosition: "COLLAPSED", value: { a!richTextItem( text: {"Melting Point"} ) } ), a!textField( label: "Text", labelPosition: "ABOVE", saveInto: {}, refreshAfter: "UNFOCUS", disabled: false, validations: {} ), a!dropdownField( choiceLabels: {"g/cm3", "kg/m3"}, choiceValues: {"g/cm3", "kg/m3"}, label: "Dropdown", labelPosition: "ABOVE", placeholder: "Select", saveInto: {}, searchDisplay: "AUTO", validations: {} ), a!textField( label: "Text", labelPosition: "ABOVE", saveInto: {}, refreshAfter: "UNFOCUS", validations: {} ), a!textField( label: "Text", labelPosition: "ABOVE", saveInto: {}, refreshAfter: "UNFOCUS", validations: {} ), a!dropdownField( choiceLabels: {"℃", "℉"}, choiceValues: {"℃", "℉"}, label: "Dropdown", labelPosition: "ABOVE", placeholder: "Select", saveInto: {}, searchDisplay: "AUTO", validations: {} ), a!dropdownField( choiceLabels: {"Property has not been measured"}, choiceValues: {"Property has not been measured"}, label: "Dropdown", labelPosition: "ABOVE", placeholder: "--- Select a Value ---", saveInto: {}, searchDisplay: "AUTO", validations: {} ) }, showWhen: if( or( ri!AOS_PhysChem['recordType!{1ddc2dbc-133e-49a3-a416-3e896db0beb4}AOS_Phys_chem.fields.{6862862b-7cbf-4b5d-be70-7944f6a23f5b}PhysicalState'] = "LIquid", ri!AOS_PhysChem['recordType!{1ddc2dbc-133e-49a3-a416-3e896db0beb4}AOS_Phys_chem.fields.{6862862b-7cbf-4b5d-be70-7944f6a23f5b}PhysicalState'] = "Solid", ri!AOS_PhysChem['recordType!{1ddc2dbc-133e-49a3-a416-3e896db0beb4}AOS_Phys_chem.fields.{6862862b-7cbf-4b5d-be70-7944f6a23f5b}PhysicalState'] = "" ), true, false) ), a!gridRowLayout( contents: { a!richTextDisplayField( labelPosition: "COLLAPSED", value: { a!richTextItem( text: {"Freezing Point"} ) } ), a!textField( label: "Text", labelPosition: "ABOVE", saveInto: {}, refreshAfter: "UNFOCUS", disabled: false, validations: {} ), a!dropdownField( choiceLabels: {"g/cm3", "kg/m3"}, choiceValues: {"g/cm3", "kg/m3"}, label: "Dropdown", labelPosition: "ABOVE", placeholder: "Select", saveInto: {}, searchDisplay: "AUTO", validations: {} ), a!textField( label: "Text", labelPosition: "ABOVE", saveInto: {}, refreshAfter: "UNFOCUS", validations: {} ), a!textField( label: "Text", labelPosition: "ABOVE", saveInto: {}, refreshAfter: "UNFOCUS", validations: {} ), a!dropdownField( choiceLabels: {"℃", "℉"}, choiceValues: {"℃", "℉"}, label: "Dropdown", labelPosition: "ABOVE", placeholder: "Select", saveInto: {}, searchDisplay: "AUTO", validations: {} ), a!dropdownField( choiceLabels: {"Property has not been measured"}, choiceValues: {"Property has not been measured"}, label: "Dropdown", labelPosition: "ABOVE", placeholder: "--- Select a Value ---", saveInto: {}, searchDisplay: "AUTO", validations: {} ) }, showWhen: if( or( ri!AOS_PhysChem['recordType!{1ddc2dbc-133e-49a3-a416-3e896db0beb4}AOS_Phys_chem.fields.{6862862b-7cbf-4b5d-be70-7944f6a23f5b}PhysicalState'] = "LIquid", ri!AOS_PhysChem['recordType!{1ddc2dbc-133e-49a3-a416-3e896db0beb4}AOS_Phys_chem.fields.{6862862b-7cbf-4b5d-be70-7944f6a23f5b}PhysicalState'] = "Solid", ri!AOS_PhysChem['recordType!{1ddc2dbc-133e-49a3-a416-3e896db0beb4}AOS_Phys_chem.fields.{6862862b-7cbf-4b5d-be70-7944f6a23f5b}PhysicalState'] = "" ), true, false) ), a!gridRowLayout( contents: { a!richTextDisplayField( labelPosition: "COLLAPSED", value: { a!richTextItem( text: {"Boiling Point"} ) } ),
Discussion posts and replies are publicly visible
This may be occurring due to the direct [ ] indexing. Try Using the property or Index function.
Can you give me an example with the full code which I provided in my previous comment. Thank you!
Like this
So I can add even more rows to hide if I want? But the problem with that will be each of rows have different property which need to be specified...
As per your requirements, You can club multiple conditions on this.
Echoing others, I'm completely perplexed as to what you're attempting to do here. Why are you manually declaring multiple a!gridRowLayout() calls in your code? That's not a standard pattern for Editable Grids at all.
What would be the best way to save that when each row should be unique row and should have unique property. Somehow I need to initialize the rule input with already field out rows for the property. And at the same time i need to hide some of the rows based on what user have selected in another field.
The use case for an editable grid is, generally, multiple rows of the same property. As Stefan mentioned a few times before, this does not sound like the use case for a grid at all. Why not just have multiple fields that the user fills out?
Sounds good, but how do you save the multiple fields in same record?
Shwapx said:but how do you save the multiple fields in same record
add multiple fields to a form?
Yes, and then how do you save multiple things in the same column. You can see my record i and the grid i will have the user enter 15 times the value but for different property which need to be written as well in the property record. How do i specifically say to the rule input that the first value is for first property.. this is the reason grid is used.
Again, just manually add the field(s) you need to a section (etc). You are free to use whatever logic you need in order to relate them to each other. Nothing about this, at least as far as your example code above is structured, requires any sort of grid whatsoever - since you're not using the grid rows to each act on a different member of an array of data, but instead hardcoding each row to look at an individual property (which is unnecessarily difficult and adds unnecessary complexity). I guess it *can* work as an editable grid (after sorting out the issues with properly addressing data, etc), though I honestly can't see the benefit it provides you.On a side note: do you have a mock-up of any sort, for what you're hoping your form/grid to eventually look like? I honestly can't even tell.
The age-old advice in cases like this, is to learn to crawl before you try to run. You should step back and familiarize yourself with how editable grids work, overall, and in a bit simpler of a setup - as well as multi-field forms that don't have/use grids. Only after you understand these fundamendals intrinsically, should you be attempting what you're trying here.
You can see it here
So just 2 rows?
no 17 exactly the same just property is different. And based on selection of text field on top some of them hide.
Shwapx said:just property is different
I'm still not sure how to make sense of this. What is the "property"? How is it determined? Why does it require hardcoding completely separate grid rows, wherein most of the fields in each aren't actually editable at all as they don't point to source data and don't have a save target?
These are hardcoded properties for each request, they have to be hardcoded.. So once user let's say fill out first row in the records in the property filed they will see Melting Point and rest of the information.If I have separate record table for each property that means I need to have 17 tables linked.. which sounds insane.. So the property can be hardcoded visually for the user (read only) and then if they fill out unit with a!save to save the unit and also the property from that row that was the intention..
Shwapx said:they have to be hardcoded
Why?
Shwapx said:that means I need to have 17 tables linked
I'm pretty sure nobody's suggesting you break this out into 17 different tables.
Shwapx said:So the property can be hardcoded visually for the user (read only)
Why isn't the property stored in the array-row's data and displayed there, as opposed to hardcoding 17 separate GridRows? Something is very much not making sense with your implementation.
If you can give me an idea how to do that would be great!"Why isn't the property stored in the array-row's data and displayed there"
Shwapx said:If you can give me an idea how to do that would be great!
It sounds as if you mean to have 17 rows of data in that particular record type. You would therefore initialize the rows in advance, setting each row to one of your desired "property" settings (i assume this is "melting point", "freezing point", etc). Then your grid could merely call a!forEach over all 17 rows of initialized data and display the needed rows. Further logic could discern whether any given row (or individual fields within it) should be treated differently depending on what the given property is, or other settings saved within that row's data per what the user's filled out.
Yes this is exactly what i need, but there is the issue I have never done that and i'm not quite sure how to:"You would therefore initialize the rows in advance, setting each row to one of your desired "property" settings (i assume this is "melting point", "freezing point", etc)"
Well, being able to initialize an array of RecordType data is really one of the simpler things you should learn about before attempting to do a (imho) somewhat complicated grid operation on them...
recordType data offers the unique challenge of not simply being able to create a local dummy and send you an example, however for the moment i've made a VERY rough example while using a generic "personnel" record type from my CE site (and we can pretend the "firstName" field is the one that should store the property, for the purposes of this). Here we start with an array of the various "properties", then merely loop over it, setting the recordType field to the current iteration's value. You can see here the result is a list of that recordType initialized with just that value set in each item.