I would use a View for the header and a View for the details, with that u could insert new records or check old ones. I would check some validation rules in the lostfocus event and in the beforerowcolchange. You could use a column in the view to check validation rules and signal that
Column+row r ok, it validates ok. In this case an integer variable could have values indicating the columns that have passed the test therefore the row is good to save. When u exit the form u check this column and save only the rows that validate ok. HTH, E. On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 4:25 PM, Gene Wirchenko <[email protected]> wrote: At 03:13 2013-11-27, Peter Cushing <[email protected]> wrote: >>Gene Wirchenko wrote: >>> I have many browses that I would like to have row-level >>> validation for. I am trying to solve the validation problem in general. >>> >>> The most important case is the work transaction table. It >>> gets data from DE and from importing from other systems used by >>> the company. All of this has to agree. Before invoicing, there >>> is a step we call "editing" where the data is checked for >>> consistency. This requires 1) being able to look at many rows at >>> once and 2) being able to edit the data. I want full validation in there. >>> >>> One of the row-level validation rules required is that >>> basicchg+ovrhdefee=dsbamt+xsvamt >>>(Those are four columns of the table.) >>Ok, so these 4 columns have to pass this rule. Simple enough having >>a form method to do some checking and you can then colour the row if >>it does not match this rule. The user then knows it has an error >>and can fix it. From what you have said so far it appears you want >>to do the validation using the valid event for each column. I'm not >>sure that will work. E.g. If you >>start off with this data: > > No, I do not want to do the validation using the valid event >for each column. That would not work. I want to use >BeforeRowColChange to do the row-level validation, and when it fail, >put the focus on one of the controls involved in the error. > >[snip] > >Sincerely, > > >Gene Wirchenko > > >_______________________________________________ >Post Messages to: [email protected] >Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox >OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech >Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox >This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/ >** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the >author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added >to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious. > > > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
