Well, since Jack, Dave, Matthew and others (shame on you, folks!) did
not post to the listserv (or else their responses have been delayed on
my email) I don't know what their suggestions were. Here are my quick
thoughts:
The found set is the active set, but if you run another find, you will
cancel the previous set. The way to do this is to either run the ebase
Query routine and select the Modify option, or run the ebase "New Find
Request" script. Subsequent finds will be treated as a logical OR.
Selecting several field parameters in one single find request will be
treated as a logical AND, and this should work in all cases except where
you need to run a logical AND on a field like source codes (where you
want just the folks who have responded to two or more source codes) -
because you can't readily run a logical AND on the same field. In this
case, as you suggest, you will need to create a temporary flagging field
in which you can mark found records before you run another query for the
second value. Continue to mark the found set in the flagging field
until you have found the entire range of values. The script you suggest
sounds plausible, but I don't have any immediate suggestions for how to
pull it off.
FYI, there is no such thing as a subset of "Independent" finds, as each
subsequent find is dependent on the first found set. Thus, build your
finds with all the criteria you need and be careful of the logic behind
how you implement the find. For a complex find, I'd suggest writing out
how you need to perform it and keep this in a file for future use.
Hope this helps,
Carl
Caryn Peter & Tobin wrote:
>
> I see that Jack Noll, Dave Shaw, Matthew Scholtz and others have pretty
> much answered this question with simialr suggestions, so thanks to them;
> but any further suggestions appreciated!
>
> Are found sets in active use, and if so, when you perform what kind of
> Find? How does a found set get 'cleared',
> or maybe I should just say I'd like some way of creating a 'filtered
> set' so that I could create a subset of records which I could then use
> for a sequence of otherwise independent finds within the subset or
> filtered set. Would setting a flag on a found set, and having the Find
> script use that flag as part of an AND find work (which looks like
> maybe what the found set scripts are already partially doing)? The
> regular Find script could be modified to always check the filter and
> ignore it if blank. You'd need a script also to set and clear the
> "Filter" (accessed by a toggled button which could also indicate the
> filter status) Would any of that work?
>
> --
> Peter Kidd
--
Carl Paulsen
New Hampshire Rivers Council
54 Portsmouth Street
Concord, NH 03301
603-228-6472
603-228-0423 Fax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
