InfoPath Dev

I've seen several posts on here, but nothing really describing HOW to complete this. Drag your secondary into the table doesn't make any sense, so boiling it down with a simple case, hoping for a simple solution: So very simply, let's say I have two controls. A drop down to pick the name of the fruit, which is populated by a list lookup. Then there is a text box for the color which is to be populated once the drop down list selection has been made. One again, referencing the same list. If I make these outside a repeating section, it works beautifully. Once it is in a repeating section, it doesn't do anything. I have tried applying the rule to the repeating section, and also the drop down control, and neither work. Thoughts?

See attached sample - save the file locally, right click and select design, then preview. The formula to set the field's value uses the current() function, which may be what is missing in your attempt.

Thank you for the quick response. That example uses an xml instead of a SharePoint list. Please see attached.

Sure - I used XML because I want you to be able to preview. Can you attach your actual template instead of a screenshot? If so, I'd be happy to take a look.

Attached. I have tried using ID as the qualifier as well as the unit name. Both return blank.

The value of your dropdown is the Title field in your list. Then for your XPath filter, you are comparing on ID. Try this one.

That works perfectly, thank you. Why does it require different filters and looksups on a repeating section than it does just as a line item?

In our XPath filter in the repeating table, we have to use current() to indicate the comparison - if your rule were on the section itself, you might use current()/my:FieldName or some other path, but you need to indicate the comparison occurs with the node the rule is on when dealing with repeating data. The filter depends on the value setting in your dropdown. For example, if your dropdown displayed the title, but stored the ID, your original XPath filter would have worked correctly.

Thank you!