TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2006-06 > 1150374820


From: Terry Reigel <>
Subject: RE: [TMG] Unnamed child
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 08:33:40 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20060615030910.XDPO18418.ibm64aec.bellsouth.net@MomsLaptop>


On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 22:14:51 -0500, Teresa Elliott wrote:
> I put in Unnamed Girl or Unnamed Boy. This way my reader
> knows that the child wasn't named. For unknown, I put
> Unknown more out of habit than need. <G>

I understand if you want to put in "Unnamed" or something like that to
say that you have evidence that the child wasn't named.

The issue I was responding to was the suggestion for when one wants to
replicate the "standard" (--?--) format for unknown names. If one is
going in that direction, I asked:

1. Why type in the string instead of leaving it blank? If you leave it
blank all such empty names can be easily changed to any desired format
in the report definition.

2. Why use the en-dash? I thought trying to avoid the unpleasant line
breaks in Word was the whole reason for using the en-dash, but Word
treats it exactly like the hyphen in my tests.

Terry


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Terry Reigel [mailto:]

> On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 16:50:39 -0700, Donald W. Range wrote:
>
>> Why not use a TMG text macro? You can paste in the two
>> endashes once, then the string is forever available
>> with Shift-F12 or whatever key combo you choose.
>>
>
> But why put anything in the name? If you leave it blank,
> you can put what every you want in the report definition,
> and change it at any time.
>
> And, why put in en-dashes? Word treats them the same as
> regular hyphens.
>
> Terry Reigel


This thread: