Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid |
![]() |
![]() |
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.misc -> Re: Forms4.5 problem
You can use SET_ITEM_PROPERTY with the ITEM_IS_VALID parameter to set the status of an ITEM. (It is important to note that this is not possible for a record.) This would have to be immediately after the change because if the record is flagged as "changed", then you are right back where you started. This is a theory, I have not actually tested it.
Alan Campbell <alan_at_mullen.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
<334cca8f.494184_at_news.demon.co.uk>...
> Can anyone advise me on how to get around a problem that I have
encountered in
> Oracle forms 4.5.
>
> I have a block that is based on a base table, which displays the contents
of
> each record and allows the user to modify the details.
>
> One of the fields (base table) is a status which is held as a character
value
> ('00'-'07'), which has an associated meaning.
> eg.
> '00' = Registered.
> '07' = Closed.
>
> I want the users to be able to modify this value without having to know
what
> each value means.
>
> What I have done is to overlay the status field with another field that
is not
> based on a base table item (this field will contain the translation of
the
> status), and created a LOV, that displays the translation of the status,
the LOV
> also updates the contents of the base table field as well as the new
field when
> the user selects a new status.
> This works ok, but the new field is only ever populated when the user
selects
> something from the LOV. What I wanted was for the new field to display
the
> status when the form starts, so I created a WHEN-NEW-FORM-INSTANCE
trigger and
> placed some code in it to populate the new field, based on the status
value from
> the underlying table.
> The problem is that the user is always prompted to save any changes to
the form
> when they exit (COMMIT_FORM), when they have not made any changes. I am
> assuming this is because I have populated the new field on startup which
has
> caused the form status to be set to changed.
>
> Is there a way around this problem ?
>
> TIA
> Alan
> ---
> Alan Campbell
> alan_at_mullen.demon.co.uk
>
Received on Thu Apr 10 1997 - 00:00:00 CDT
![]() |
![]() |