I have just modified my html.pl with the blank field mod (taken from resources where it appeared in a JPD posting on 4th May 1999).
This appeared to work well, and blank fields were correctly omitted from the long form display.
I have just discovered, however, that during a "list all" request, the short form display is showing an inconsistency. Only the second page of ten records is affected. What is happening to the fourth to tenth record is that the third field record is appearing in the second field, and subsequent fields move up one place. All subsequent pages are fine.
I have checked the database file for errors, and there are none - in fact the long form display of these fields is perfectly correct.
Could the code for the blank fields be causing this. I have used the following code surrounding my html table code:
|;
if ($rec{'Fieldname'} gt $db_defaults{Fieldname}) {
print qq|
[html]
|;
}
print qq|
I have only applied this code to the long form html because there is no need for it in the short form.
Maybe this old code has been superseded, and I missed it.
I am baffled and would appreciate help.
Thanks
David Olley
Anglo & Foreign International Limited,
Winchester
England
This appeared to work well, and blank fields were correctly omitted from the long form display.
I have just discovered, however, that during a "list all" request, the short form display is showing an inconsistency. Only the second page of ten records is affected. What is happening to the fourth to tenth record is that the third field record is appearing in the second field, and subsequent fields move up one place. All subsequent pages are fine.
I have checked the database file for errors, and there are none - in fact the long form display of these fields is perfectly correct.
Could the code for the blank fields be causing this. I have used the following code surrounding my html table code:
|;
if ($rec{'Fieldname'} gt $db_defaults{Fieldname}) {
print qq|
[html]
|;
}
print qq|
I have only applied this code to the long form html because there is no need for it in the short form.
Maybe this old code has been superseded, and I missed it.
I am baffled and would appreciate help.
Thanks
David Olley
Anglo & Foreign International Limited,
Winchester
England