Test for UX is dirty

[Peter.Greulich]

How can I test to see if the UX is dirty?

[mikeallenbrown]

Re: Test for UX is dirty

How about a static text with a show/hide expression dialog.isDirty = 1

[Peter.Greulich]

Re: Test for UX is dirty

Mike,

I need to test it in a script.

[Scott Emerick]

Re: Test for UX is dirty

Hey Peter,

I am trying to figure out the same thing. Tried {dialog.object}.isDirty, {dialog.object}.isDataDirty, and no joy. They work fine in Enable/Disable, but not in a script.

What I am trying to do is prevent navigation of a list control if UX is dirty.

Hopefully someone has a answer ...

Scott

[TheSmitchell]

Re: Test for UX is dirty

{dialog.object}._isDirty and {dialog.object}._isDataDirty are the javascript variables you can test. There also appears to be a {dialog.object}._getDirtyLists property. Exciting!

If these options are inadequate, you can get the original values from the {dialog.object}.originalValues property and manually compare against the controls.

[Pizzadude]

Re: Test for UX is dirty

This is how I do it....


In the client-side onDataStateChange, put this:

if (e.isDataDirty == true) {
{dialog.Object}.__uxDirty = true;
}else {
{dialog.Object}.__uxDirty = false;
}

Then I use something like this in the onFocus or onClick event of controls:

if ({dialog.Object}.__uxDirty == true) {
var r=confirm("Data has changed. Do you want to save your changes?");
if (r==true){
{dialog.Object}.submit();
{dialog.Object}.__uxDirty = false;
}else{
{dialog.Object}.resetForm();
{dialog.Object}.__uxDirty = false;
}
}else{
{dialog.Object}.__uxDirty = false;
}


Or something like this:

if ({dialog.Object}.__uxDirty == true) {

// this action must exist in js actions
{dialog.object}.runAction('messYouMustSaveBeforeContinuing');
return false;

}else{
// Put the action you want to run if the record is not dirty here.
{dialog.object}.runAction(yourActionHere');
}


I need to credit Steve Workings with supplying me with most of this code when I was trying to do the same thing!

[Peter.Greulich]

Re: Test for UX is dirty

Thanks both. That's very helpful!

[Scott Emerick]

Re: Test for UX is dirty

Yes thank you both ... Amazing that the underbar made the difference.

[CarlMPearson]

Re: Test for UX is dirty

OK, I can tell if the list is dirty, but the COUNT of dirt is of interest on the mobile device.

I can loop the list, but there is commonly 500-1000 in the list (it is people out on a route) and looping is too slow.

Is there a COUNT field hiding someplace? I've looked, but have not found.

Something like
var dirtycount = {dialog.Object}.__uxDirtyCount; // would be ideal

[Pizzadude]

Re: Test for UX is dirty

You should only be looking at one record at a time, so only one record can be dirty.

Perhaps you can provide more specific info on what you are trying to do.

[CarlMPearson]

Re: Test for UX is dirty

The mobile unit has a list, normally in the range of 500-1000. The route person collects data and submits the list after every stop.

When functioning, and in RF coverage, the one just read is sync'd to the server. However, if connectivity is disturbed, the route person proceeds to collect additional information at the next stop, normally about every 1-3 minutes. The orange triangles on the list show that the data has not been successfully synch'd, but the user may not observe the list while they work on other data entry screens.

99% of the time each reading flies to the sky without issue. Some areas don't have good coverage and 5->10->...40 get queued up for eventual synch.

I need to know how many in the list are still un-synch'd, namely dirty. Actual usage makes keeping my own count cumbersome and unreliable without significant work.

The route person might not know that they discarded 30-40 readings until they get to the web, and then they have to go re-visit the missed data. Ugly words ensue.

They often take photos that need a time-stamp, GPS, and additional data. Losing this makes them even crankier.

Something like this in Javascript
var dirtycount = {dialog.Object}.__uxDirtyCount;
would be ideal.

[Pizzadude]

Re: Test for UX is dirty

I don't use AA to do anything like your situation, but I would think the Dirty and Unsynked (or Sync Failed") would be different properties.

[CarlMPearson]

Re: Test for UX is dirty

Dirty count should be 0, or 1 briefly after collecting data. If dirty count climbs, then syncing isn't working.

var dirtycount = {dialog.Object}.__uxDirtyCount;

if (dirtycount > 10) {

alert("DANGER WILL ROBINSON! Your precious data is piling up and instead of being PO'd at the programmer, WiFi, or ATT, please step out of the basement, sync your data, get rid of the orange triangles, and don't reboot your phone until the little 'Orange Thingies' are gone. Or at least don't blame me!");

}

[compuaid]

Re: Test for UX is dirty

The documentation for lists provides a method to do exactly what you're looking for:

var o = {dialog.object}.countRecordsToSynch('listOrders')
alert('You have ' + o.count + ' records to synchronize')

There's a surprisingly detailed amount of documentation on everything you can do with lists at http://downloads.alphasoftware.com/A...DetailView.htm

[CarlMPearson]

Re: Test for UX is dirty

XXXOOO! So I see! Thank you!

I will plow through that thesis of a document.

Anyplace where there is a list of functions?

For years I've read lists of APIs and it is amazing how often, weeks later, months later, I will know it exists and will re-hunt it down.

AA is so rich and there are gems hiding everywhere. I know they are there, but finding them is my challenge.

Carl
Dallas