How do I save multiple selections in a checkboxField? I tried displaying the cho

judym598

Certified Senior Developer

over 9 years ago

How do I save multiple selections in a checkboxField? I tried displaying the choiceValues using a rule (e.g., rule!psh_getAllFruits) that pulled data from a cdt (PSH_Fruits). The CDT is associated with a table (pshfruits) that has 2 columns: id (auto-generated integer) and fruitType (text). I wanted to store the selected id(s) in a field in another CDT (specifically newList_cdt.fruitType). I originally had 'fruit' as an integer. When that didn't work, I decided to change my approach to displaying the choiceValues using a constant (cons!PSH_FRUITS) and using a checkboxFieldByIndex; couldn't get that to work, so I went with the following and changed the data type of the column in the table (and CDT for this item) to 'text'. It works as long as I only select one item. (I actually have 8 choices so I'd really prefer to pull the choiceValues from a CDT - lookup table). I cannot get it to save or display multiple selections. At one point...

Discussion posts and replies are publicly visible

Parents

0 jackm829
A Score Level 3
over 9 years ago

@nara, Your code previously suggested splitting the string and comparing to: choiceValues: {"B", "A", "P", "G"}. I think this approach would have the drawback I describe (name changes of "B" to "BN" and such). However, if you are suggesting storing the ID in a delimited fashion (i.e. 1;2;3;4), then yes I think that would be immune to name changes. In this case, we likely would not be able to use foreign keys, and this may have some effect on querying, though using various query filters there may be workarounds.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel

Reply

0 jackm829
A Score Level 3
over 9 years ago

@nara, Your code previously suggested splitting the string and comparing to: choiceValues: {"B", "A", "P", "G"}. I think this approach would have the drawback I describe (name changes of "B" to "BN" and such). However, if you are suggesting storing the ID in a delimited fashion (i.e. 1;2;3;4), then yes I think that would be immune to name changes. In this case, we likely would not be able to use foreign keys, and this may have some effect on querying, though using various query filters there may be workarounds.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel

Children

No Data