TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2007-11 > 1195153660


From: "Richard Damon" <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Is there a reason that After does not sort as After?
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 14:07:40 -0500
References: <004001c827a6$9c7cfb30$d576f190$@net> <7.0.1.0.2.20071115114807.0de051f0@whollygenes.com><004501c827ae$22fd0860$68f71920$@net>
In-Reply-To: <004501c827ae$22fd0860$68f71920$@net>


Actually, it sort of has that now, but entering a sort date of "After dec
31, 1931" for a date of "after 1931" it will sort as I think you want it.

As for before dates, "before 1931" sorts before any more specific date in
1931 (since the program treats 1931 as 0/0/1931 internally)

Richard Damon

-----Original Message-----
From: [mailto:] On Behalf
Of GeneJ
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 12:37 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [TMG] Is there a reason that After does not sort as After?

Thank you Bob and all.
Perhaps one day TMG's Preferences will allow the use of either the default
sort style ("after means in"), or apply a more literal sort style. Golly, in
the space right below "circa means" I can just see "after means" ( ) in, or
( ) after.
I haven't looked at it recently, but does a date entered as "before" also
sort as "in" for the purpose of reports? <G> --GJ


This thread: