[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

# RE: carriage return in @precinct

- To: <rcr@dieboldes.com>
- Subject: RE: carriage return in @precinct
- From: "Ken Clark" <ken@dieboldes.com>
- Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 16:49:13 -0600
- Importance: Normal
- In-Reply-To: <00a601c092e2$91f9b820$0a04a8c0@dieboldes.com>

From: owner-rcr@dieboldes.com [mailto:owner-rcr@dieboldes.com]On Behalf Of Nel Finberg Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 3:52 PM GBS need to print precinct, ward and district on the ballot. These three items are currently defined in the base precinct name, but can obviously only be formatted with spaces in the label field. Okay, so its a formatting thing. I had already discussed with them the possibility of an @district macro, however, the district reference would be ambiguous and printing all districts which contain the base precinct is not desirable, either. It would have to be @district-XXX (or something like that), where XXX was the parent district number. Would that, with the existing @precinct macro, satisfy their formatting requirements? Are you implying that you (plural) are intending on moving towards a Word-style full rich text edit? If so, when would this be implemented? No, we aren't intending anything. It is just one way to skin this cat. This "variable ballot data" issue comes up a fair amount, hence the second-pass stuff that Spectrum does on our postscript. I will bounce it off Tab and Dean when they return and try to come up with a solution that will address this in general. Formatting and labels are purposely divorced concepts, so hopefully the control character suggestion is not the only solution here. Ken

- Follow-Ups:
  - Re: carriage return in @precinct
    - From: "Nel Finberg" <nel@dieboldes.com>

- References:
  - Re: carriage return in @precinct
    - From: "Nel Finberg" <nel@dieboldes.com>

- Prev by Date: Re: carriage return in @precinct
- Next by Date: Re: carriage return in @precinct
- Index(es):
  - Chronological
  - Thread