@Bill.French @ScottWorld I have installed the maps extension and successfully set up a field with the static map API to generate a static map based on an address and populate an image of that map as an attachment in a field for each record.
How do I get this to run automatically when a new record is created or a new record enters a specific view?
I have tried using the script from the extension in a script automation triggered by an event (new record, record enters a view etc.) and it doesn’t like the script from the extension
If it were me, I would just do this without any coding by using Make.com to “get a static map image” from Google Maps.
This feature is built directly into Make:
MapBox isn’t supported by either Make or Zapier, but you could always create your own custom HTTP calls to MapBox by using the HTTP module:
I know, that’s the same thing that you said in your original post.
Otherwise, I have this working just fine with Make & Google Maps – below is what it looks like.
You’re probably getting stuck because Google Maps returns an image, but Airtable requires a URL. That’s why you always need to upload your images to a cloud drive first to get a valid URL:
If you don’t instinctively know exactly what to do to address this requirement using automation script and MapBox, you are unlikely to succeed at the approach I use. That leaves you with three outs -
As to #1, I’m slammed until mid 2024, but there are a lot of great consultants here in the community.
As a newcomer to that platform, to master Make to solve this challenge, you’ll need at least 16 times that effort. This is why Make consultants are so valuable - they charge a lot, but they get the project on its feet in minutes.
That kinda depends on the nature of the help from Vivid Squid, and how both parties feel about sharing information that might have been part of a paid consultation.
I’m all for sharing solutions, but it can tricky to find the right balance when the solution involves intellectual property, as can be the case with a scripting solution.
This is why I suggested he share the “approach”, not the details.
I use this community to read how others have accomplished success or met failure. I don’t ask them for code. But when I spend 15 minutes reading a topic only to find the last post says something like “I solved it.”, it is extremely irritating and especially so when lots of people chimed in with assistance.
The success of a community like this is dependent upon answers, guideposts, and other clues so that less-informed users don’t have to start from scratch or spend endless days exploring all the slot canyons for a way out.
Magellan escorted no one to their destination, but his maps provided millions of people with information that kept them alive.
I agree with @Bill.French’s assessment.
Another thing that irritates me is when people like the original author show absolutely no gratitude or appreciation for the people who are trying to help by volunteering their time. It is also irritating when authors provide no additional context to their problems.
And even though I provided the complete solution to him (in a no-code/low-code way) with a screenshot from Make, there was zero gratitude from the author.
Also, when I asked the author to provide screenshots or additional information on why he wasn’t able to get it working in Make, he provided no additional details.
This is why I have now blocked the original author, so I won’t mistakenly give him help in the future.
I don’t have time to block anyone, but I also don’t have endless resources to give either. But I see your point.
I think it’s about the spirit of paying-it-forward; I don’t expect anything in return for my comments (which tend to be worthless in many cases), but I do expect a certain degree of sharing to expand the knowledge base and the conversation of specific challenges that users face.
That’s not the reaction anyone wants to see. This community is a wonderful resource BECAUSE you and everyone (for that matter) “bothered” us. :winking_face: Without expressing your challenges, there would be no knowledge. As such, I encourage the opposite - continue to bother the community with questions and help us document the pathways to better apps.
well Bill - I’m working 60-70 hours a week right now wearing multiple hats for multiple companies (none of which is being a developer) - I was in a hurry last night - and just wanted to let people (who offered to help) that the problem was solved so they (or no one else) would bother/waste time chiming in since the issue was resolved. I didn’t have time last night to type out a detailed response on why I did it this way and not using a no-code solution or how it was solved. Instead of taking the high road - some people choose to slam me for what I did or didn’t do. Like you, I don’t have time for that. So fine - I’m done.
It sounds like the approach is to use a scripting automation provided by Vivid Squid. Since the original poster wasn’t able to write the script himself, he may not be able to share more details.
I agree that when someone gets help, etiquette calls for a follow up with appropriate details. It can be tricky to determine what level of detail is appropriate.
In this case, the original poster judged that posting who he used (presumably paid) to get the answer was the level of detail that he was comfortable with. I think this is better than not returning at all. I also wondered if he felt pressured to share info that he had paid for.