[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference iosg::all-in-1_v30

Title:*OLD* ALL-IN-1 (tm) Support Conference
Notice:Closed - See Note 4331.l to move to IOSG::ALL-IN-1
Moderator:IOSG::PYE
Created:Thu Jan 30 1992
Last Modified:Tue Jan 23 1996
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:4343
Total number of notes:18308

4056.0. "merge: TABS in WPS-PLUS boilerplates misalign" by UTRTSC::SCHOLLAERT (Office WEBmaster) Thu Apr 07 1994 11:47

Hello,

Need some feedback. ALL-IN-1 3.0.

Customer reports the following problem.

Using real TABs in WPS-PLUS boilerplates results in misaligned
output from the ALL-IN-1 format function.

The boilerplates are merged with WPS-PLUS as output format.

When editing the output document, you can see that the tabs in
the text are  not in line with the T's in the ruler at those places 
where a symbol replacement has been done. Columns look messed up.

After the document has been reformatted by GOLD ARROW DOWN,
formatting/printing works fine.

Customer uses a detached process as a printprocessor for
hundreds of boilerplates. So interactive reformatting between the
merge and the format is not possible.

When the customer started the development of his boilerplates,
he read the ALL-IN-1 prog ref manual..........
The description of the merge function states that
"you can use ALL of the WPS-PLUS formatting features". So he did.

Am I correct to thank this customer for his comments and
that this is a restricting in the current release and 
that he should use the <&TAB> directive and that digital will
consider to remove this restricting in PFR ? Or is this a documentation
mistake.

Regards,

Jan
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
4056.1You know thisOAMATE::WICKS_AFri Apr 08 1994 17:407
    Jan,
    
    would need an SPr for either the code or docs to change.
    
    Regards,
    
    Andrew.D.wicks
4056.2SPR (IPMT case level 3) it will beUTRTSC::SCHOLLAERTOffice WEBmasterMon Apr 11 1994 08:0816
    Andrew,
    
    >would need an SPr for either the code or docs to change.
    
    That's the feedback I needed. I considered this problem
    to be a bug of low priority in the merge function, not worth a CLD.
    
    I know this customer, and they might insist on a fix.   
    
    Thanks,
    
    Jan