Ah, that makes perfect sense. It hadn't even occurred to me to have a field 
recompute itself like that. (I think DP takes the crown for being the most 
programmable "non-programmable" database.) I had been spending some time 
scouring Ralph's book this morning, but I must have missed this, or didn't 
search for the right term. Thanks Paul. 

-Dave Britten

> On Dec 22, 2016, at 9:00 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> 
> Hi Dave:
> 
> You would use a formula on your field like the following (assumes your U1 
> field is P1F6):
> 
> if P1F6 = "Y" then "Y"
> else if P1F6 = "N" then "N"
> else ""
> endif endif
> 
> Set validation to "Automatically computed at any change and when record is 
> saved".
> 
> This won't allow any entry except Y or N to be saved.
> 
> Incidentally, be sure to find and download Ralph Alvy's book "Mastering 
> DataPerfect" if you haven't already done so. It's a great guide to fully 
> using DP.
> 
> Paul Durban
> 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [Dataperf] Implementing a Y/N field (or: constraining a U1 field)
> Date: 2016-12-22 08:39
> From: Dave Britten <[email protected]>
> To: DataPerfect Mailing List <[email protected]>
> 
> Howdy folks,
> 
> It seems like this ought to be a simple thing, but I'm just not quite getting 
> there. I need to have a few fields that accept either "Y" or "N". U1 fields 
> are the obvious choice. How can I constrain the user's input to only "Y" or 
> "N"? Setting range validation on the field obviously won't do it, since you 
> can't give a list of discontinuous values to validate against.
> 
> I tried adding a calculated field next to it that translates the "Y" and "N" 
> to 1 and 0, and defaults to 2 for anything else, then putting 0-1 range 
> validation on that. It sort of works if that surrogate field isn't hidden, 
> but if it's hidden, the validation doesn't seem to run.
> 
> Is the simplest way to do this by creating a panel that holds the "Y" and "N" 
> values, and using that as a target for no-create data links in the entry 
> forms? I could swear I read something in passing about doing this kind of 
> validation with field formulas and range validation, but I'm not having any 
> success finding it now.
> 
> -Dave Britten
> _______________________________________________
> Dataperf mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.dataperfect.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dataperf
> _______________________________________________
> Dataperf mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.dataperfect.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dataperf
_______________________________________________
Dataperf mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.dataperfect.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dataperf

Reply via email to