I made a video showing the problem because otherwise the post would be a novel. If anything is unclear or I’m not showing something, please ask. Any help would be unbelievably appreciated. See video here
What can I do to get this to enter the correct information to the database and remove the correct entry from the repeating groups?
Below are screenshots of my setup.
Ok hey! I have a way of doing this that I’m not sure is the best, but it works for me:
On the user I have a “Currently Viewing” field, which for you will be a type of “CheckPointLog”
The Floating group can now reference the current user’s “Currently Viewing” item and you don’t have to worry about finding what to show in that floating group because it will always be the user’s “currently viewing” 's Checkpointlog
So the workflow goes like this:
User clicks on a person, the workflow modify’s the current user’s “Currently viewing” to the “checkpointlog” they clicked. → Show Floating group.
Let me know if this makes sense.
Hey @jobs! Thank you for the response. I guess I’m not really following after reading that over a few times and taking a look around. Are you looking at creating a custom state or a field in the Check Point Log data type for the Currently Viewing?
Hi there, @bryan.beneker… if I remember correctly, I think I introduced you to the merged with option, so I feel a bit of an obligation to jump in on this one and say I don’t think you should be using it the way you are in this situation. 
If I understand everything correctly (which could easily not be the case), I think all you need to do is send the Current cell's CheckpointLog to the floating group when one of the visitors is clicked (and you might already be doing that). Then, in your second screenshot, make the data source the Parent group's CheckpointLog, and you should be able to access that log’s information in the elements in that group. I’m definitely not following what all the merges are for (I could be missing something, though), and I am guessing that is causing the issue.
Hope this helps.
Best…
Mike
Hey @mikeloc ! Yes, as sad as it may be, I’m actually very excited about that merged with option. I can see where I might have been a bit over zealous in using it. My thinking was, “OK, how I am I going to send data from three different repeating groups to one group?” That immediately came to mind…
Simpler is better! Once again that worked, and boy am I thankful. One thing I wasn’t doing was sending data to the depart group holding the inputs within the floating group. I found that I could still access the data when I simplified down, but it then wouldn’t remove the entry. So there were a couple things there.
@mikeloc , as always, thank you so much!
This topic was automatically closed after 70 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
