I can't imagine the scenario you describe, therefore I am not understanding what you have said.   Why would I be looking at, say, Smith and decide to Filter for %mith?  I mean, the user is already there?

Clearly I am missing something.

What I see mostly is a user working from a random stack of input data, in which case the user is bouncing all around the file.  Or a user is working from ordered input of some particular field so a subfile that sorts by columns fills that need.  Adding filters on columns is  easy and, for the super user, a welcome surprise.

In other words I see no real case today for either the expandable _or_ the singlepage subfile.  The days of the 300 baud modems are behind us.


On 12/30/2019 2:12 PM, Jon Paris wrote:
You've clearly never watched a confused user spend time trying to find the record they were looking at that caused them to want to sort/filter the subfile to see "how many others are like this".

My personal take is that once you have displayed a list of items and the user asks you to sort it or filter it - then you should be sorting/filtering_that_ list - not a new one.

That's why I always build subfiles in memory and sequence/filter internally not by re-doing the query which is what your approach results in.

Of course the user should always have the option to refresh the list - but I don't think it should ever be refreshed "behind their back".

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2022 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.