Search results by user ID 5119

Re: 'The Table specified does not exist' message

steveb — Mon, 22 Jun 2015 19:26:07 GMT

Hi Jonathan,

I got it resolved. I must have inadvertanly typed in some bad code after the last time I ran the program (about 2 months ago). It let the program run but only for the MNVSoftwareLLCDT account. Very strange. But it is working on all accounts now.

Thanks for your help (and the testing from different code).

Re: 'The Table specified does not exist' message

steveb — Thu, 18 Jun 2015 12:51:07 GMT

Jonathan,

Access is turned on. Do you need me out while you do your testing?

Re: 'The Table specified does not exist' message

steveb — Wed, 17 Jun 2015 15:18:55 GMT

Hi Jonathan,

I think it was about this same time yesterday (Tuesday) morning. Probably a few times between about 10AM and noon EDT.

I just attempted it again (about 11:10AM EDT or so) and received the same error when the code reached the 'Activity' table. This exact code has worked before, including custom tables and table with modifictions, but seemed to fail after adding the Expense Report app on Monday. The tables being read, by the way, come from a 'live' retrival of table names immediately before attempting to read the field information from each table. I was successful using the MNVSoftwareLLCDT account yesterday (which is clean out of the box), but didn't try it again today.

Anything else you need, let me know.

Thanks,

'The Table specified does not exist' message

steveb — Tue, 16 Jun 2015 14:42:48 GMT

Hi all,

I have been developing several 'apps' that use the API. One of the 'tools' I have built dumps the table and field information for all tables / fields in a specific (customer's) database. I attempted to run this on my TemplateStevenBlaustein account and frequently (several tables both standard Method tables and customized tables) generates the following message:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="windows-1252" ?><MethodAPI response = "Failure. The Table specified does not exist." ></MethodAPI>

However, the same (at least standard Method tables) are processed from my company's account with no issue. I have looked at the tables in the 'template' account and everything, including the related screens appears to work during normal signin. These are both QB desktop applications.

Does anybody have any ideas what the issue is?

General issues and comments from a 1st demonstration

steveb — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 14:27:50 GMT

Hi all,

I'm far from an expert in the not for profit field. I do have a very long time friend who has consulted in that industry and knows much more than I do. I gave him a presentation yesterday during which we uncovered the following issues, some more critical than others.

1) Terminology is a 'huge' issue in this marketplace. In a couple of places the term 'Customer' is replaced with either 'Donor' or 'Donor (Customer)'. In many more cases only the word 'Customer' appears. Not for Profits don't know what a customer is. These really need to be replaced and quickly. Potential 'customers' for the use of the app will reject it simply for that reason.

2) When selecting Items a 'Donation' or 'Non-Donation' items, the checkbox are not reset after updating as 'mark as donation' or 'mark as non donation'. The checkboxes stay on the newly displayed rows which not have different item names displayed.

3) There is a disconnect between donor receipts and sales receipts. When leaving the donor app and going to the sales receipts app the 'default' filter (shared sales receipts) show all donor receipts. When selecting 'my sales receipts' no receipts are displayed, even though I am the user who entered the donor receipts. Similarly, 'my sales receipts from today' does not report today's donor receipt. All other filters (based upon a limited test) appear to be working properly.

Thanks,

Steve

Re: Method:New Mobile ... separate apps (only mobile ready)

steveb — Tue, 12 May 2015 14:32:09 GMT

Audisho,

I 'guess' my original thinking was to be able to determine what type of device / screen (i.e. tablet - landscape or portrait - , phone - landscape or portrait - , etc.). Based on your prior answer that the 'mobile user' variable gives that information, I guess maybe the 'browser' variable isn't necessary.

Thanks,

Steve

Re: Method:New Mobile ... separate apps (only mobile ready)

steveb — Tue, 12 May 2015 14:05:06 GMT

Hi Audisho,

It isn't in 'M:H' now or is never going to be, because it isn't needed?

Thanks,

Steve

Method:New Mobile ... separate apps (only mobile ready)

steveb — Mon, 11 May 2015 19:21:14 GMT

Hi all,

From research and prior knoledge I know that 'Classic' mobile screens had a checkbox on login. That check box is gone with single sign in.

I saw (yes physically went and met with) a new prospect this morning that is going to want mobile apps (specifically iPad) for at least some of their custom screens. They want to limit the screens that are available on the mobile device to those that are 'mobile ready'. In there terms that may mean a subset of the information available on the desktop screens.

Three questions ... first does the signin now detect the device from which signin is occuring (rather than our having to tell it) and know it is a mobile device and what kind (I saw a session variable that says 'is mobile device'? Second, is there an easy way select those applicatins (or specifically screens within applications) that are mobile ready? Finally, I saw another session vaiable that reports the browser's version number, does it also report the browser name (Haven't found a use yet, but it is along the same line of questions)?

Thanks,

Steve

outlook or exchange/outlook365

steveb — Tue, 05 May 2015 21:24:21 GMT

Hi all,

I have new client that is running Outlook 2013 on her desktop with an Outlook 365 back end (rather than Exchange). Will this cause any issues with the Outlook Plugin?

Thanks,

Steve

new login requirements

steveb — Fri, 30 Jan 2015 15:38:13 GMT

Hi all,

With the new requirement to change the login ... removing the company name from the login process ... will we be getting a new WSDL, etc. or just an additional (replacement) instruction for the login?

I am developing several applications and would like to start with the new requirements rather than having to go back and 'fix' them reight away.

Thanks,

Steve