Home      FAQ      Forum      Idea Exchange      Ask a Question      My Stuff      Help   
  
Previous/Next Record arrows
It would be great if there was a way to move through records by clicking Previous/Next instead of having to close a record to open the next one.
ID
618
Category
User Experience
Author

Megan Pillsbury
Date Created
4/13/2013 3:18:30 AM
Date Updated
3/22/2017 7:00:04 PM
Status
New Idea
Score
160
Promoted By
Jeff CollingwoodJeff ZortmanRick Cogley
Philipp MatuschkaLocation LogicRafael Muñiz
rishi uttamMichael Ver Duinbasenine
Mike RyanRobert GustavssonLeo Howell
Simon PetralliWill Welbornmartin oliver
Megan Pillsbury
Comments
Philipp Matuschka 4/14/2013 10:40:26 AM
I raised a similar suggestion a while back.
Leo Howell 9/27/2013 5:43:49 PM
This is a major efficiency feature...there are many cases where a user wants to display a set of records and move through them one by one.
Mike Ryan 11/18/2013 3:39:06 PM
This would be a huge time saver for myself and our staff.

Rafael Muñiz 2/11/2014 3:24:33 PM
Please consider the next/back record buttom. A must!
Mike Ryan 2/11/2014 3:29:05 PM
This function would save my office a significant amount of time and seems a natural progression given all of the excellent upgrades constantly implemented by the teamdesk staff. I hope they will consider making this much needed upgrade.
rishi uttam 11/14/2014 6:15:08 AM
Oh Boy, Yes this should not be too hard in a .net environment. Lots of VB applications has this built in, including Access and should not be too difficult to translate to the web.

Rick Cogley 3/10/2017 8:06:35 PM
In-line edit works for certain cases where you'd use prev and next buttons, but, if the information is something you really need a full screen for, having these on the edit form would be a welcome addition. Also, a simple keyboard shortcut for them, like arrows, would be really helpful.
basenine 3/11/2017 6:29:23 AM
I reckon I could make some xhtml buttons for you that would replicate this function.
Use URLRoot() .... and Sum(RecordId(),1) .... for NEXT record and ..........,-1) for previous

I'll send through some code tomorrow if it works

Rick Cogley 3/11/2017 6:54:41 AM
hi basenine - yeah, I'd imagined that, but wonder if RecordId() is always contiguous, allowing for that math operation. Also, I suppose sorting has an impact too.

Assuming your [Id] is an and not prefixed, you create a [Number Id] field that changes your auto-number Id into an integer. Then you can get the last N number of records by creating a self:self relation, then creating a summary column like "Id Number of Nth Record", which for N=30 would be:

* Function: Index
* Sort by: Id Number order by Descending
* Index: by number 30
* Value column: Id Number

That gives you a set of 30 no matter what their Ids are. Then you create a formula check like:

[Use in XYZ view?]
Formula:
[Id Number] >= [Id Number of Nth Record]

I have not tried it, but, I wonder could we not get the next record in either direction, in this manner.

The problem I see with this is, what match condition to use on the self:self relation. If you let it search all the records, I imagine it'd be extra slow.
Rick Cogley 3/11/2017 7:06:47 AM
your [Id] is an and not => your [Id] is not
basenine 3/11/2017 12:08:26 PM
Trouble will be if a record is deleted....
This is probably why TD haven't got a solution for it as well
Philipp Matuschka 3/11/2017 1:11:27 PM
While the deleted record is a challenge it's no reason not to do it
Philipp (JFDI/Teamdesk) 3/13/2017 4:00:29 AM
The other thing is that it is not just about the NEXT or PREVIOUS record in the entire database, but the NEXT or PREVIOUS record in the current view, obeying any current filtering, grouping or sorting.

I have no idea how the internals of TeamDesk deal with this. I know in the past when I wrote code at that level in a system called MAPPER we held the result of the search in memory which allowed us to do this kind of stepping forward and back.
basenine 3/22/2017 6:17:25 PM
@Rick
>The problem I see with this is, what match condition to use on the self:self relation. If you let it search all the records, I imagine it'd be extra slow.

I wonder if you could create a Formula - Date field with value Between([Date Created],100,-100)...? might need some tweaking
Then match condition against that...will show records for 200 days
Rick Cogley 3/22/2017 6:37:13 PM
That should work, if the assumption is that there are recent records in terms of date.
It does not work on stale data, so you'd need next on a record id for that, I think.
basenine 3/22/2017 6:39:05 PM
Yes - my thought behind it was if you're not using it every day or at least once a month, PREVIOUS/NEXT probably isn't your biggest priority (and there wouldn't be many records to filter through)
basenine 3/22/2017 6:40:19 PM
It'd be Between(ToDate([Date Created]),100d, -100d) too probably
Rick Cogley 3/22/2017 7:00:04 PM
Could be Days(100), I'd have to test it.

This Prev/Next function is really useful for something like a glossary. It might be loaded and never edited (so, dates are not so good for this).

When people learn the terms, they want to loop through the terms without too much fiddling. A one click or one keypress solution is best.
Feedback
 
Back to Search Results