bug: placing record information in title or footer

If you place record information in a title or header part, than this information is not correctly updated in Preview-mode!!

In you browse thru the records (in preview-mode) the record information in the title or footer stays the same.

placing record info in title or footer is undefined, which recorddata whould you expect if there are 20 records on a page? (it is just not possible to define)

I don’t agree.
In Filemaker this is possible and used in dozens of solutions.
If you have a one-record-page-view than this record data is shown in the title or footer.
If you have multiple-record-page-view (list-view) the last record on that page is shown in the title or footer.

And I don’t think I am the only-one using this feature.

Try it in Servoy, if you scroll thru the records, (in browse-mode) the footer is updated correctly. In Preview it isn’t.

I usually put global fields in my FMP headers (or footers). How are you using this in FMP?

I can’t really imagine a use for putting record-specific data in a header or footer… :wink:

Bob Cusick
ClickWare

We us it a lot.
for example with invoices, we specify record-related-info about the invoice.
like:
payment dates
garantees
etc..

for example in sub-summarys (with page-break) when you sort this by a specific record you can place this record in the title-header showing it is list of this record!

so I can go on!
Comeon! am I the only one using this? :?

In many Filemaker-solutions I have seen that this is used too.

Just to make sense!

I have had to do this in FileMaker before to get the fields to print out in the proper location for preprinted forms.

[EDIT] In FileMaker I have had to use fields in the header and footer from a specific record before as the preprinted forms the client needed to print on had totals at the bottom of the form and a date at the very top. So to get it to print in the proper place we put the field in the header and footer. So I would need this to work in Servoy.

Daniel

Hugh..?? :? What did you had to do?
Can you explain a little bit more?

The behaviour is changed as requested, will be availeble in next build