TMG-L ArchivesArchiver > TMG > 2011-03 > 1300520711
From: Rick Van Dusen <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Overlapping accents
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2011 00:45:11 -0700
References: <43930D1653DC4993ADC7199143100D53@JLDesktop> <2011318201016.770549@Terry><73ACBB95A4454149B32CDC2F95350D09@JLDesktop>
Actually, Terry's suggestion would not "give [you] no accent for 'not
cleaned' people," but would not allow you to see the accent. But that's
necessary, because AFAIK you can't have two accents showing at the same
time (one person showing in two colors at once).
So therefore if you prioritize "not cleaned" status with your accent,
that will override the "end of line" accent.
If, on the other hand, you prioritize "end of line", anyone "end of
line" will not show as "not cleaned" until made "not end of line". (I
can't see you being happy with this approach.)
Perhaps you can combine the flags, and have four conditions to one flag:
not cleaned and not end
cleaned and not end
not cleaned and end
cleaned and end
And assign different-colored accents to each condition (or at least to
the three you care about). (This will mean changing your cleaned/not
cleaned condition from your present reference entry to a flag.)
Repeating the principle: Your highest-priority accent will appear if the
condition exists. If not, then the second-highest gets a chance to
appear, and so forth, for as many accent possibilities as you wish to
create (up to whatever the limit is, if any). The highest priority that
meets the condition for an accent will show its accent.
Joan Lince wrote:
> Thanks, Terry and Rick. I think I am almost up to Aha!
> I guess I was thinking that people had to have an accent to have a color but
> now I realize that of course there's a default color that would show for
> unaccented people.
> But if I understand Terry's suggestion, it would give me no accent for "not
> cleaned" people who are end of line. It seems to me that they are a group
> that need to be singled out. In some cases the process of cleaning them up
> might make me aware of leads to pursue in order to extend the line.
> In view of this, would it make sense to reverse Terry's recommendation, and
> put "cleaned" first, but otherwise do it exactly as Terry says? Then am I
> correct in thinking I would end up with all my cleaned people in one color,
> and the uncleaned people who are end of line in another color, and the
> uncleaned people who are not end of line in the default color?
> Or is there any way to have a fourth color (besides default,
> cleaned/uncleaned, and end-of-line? The fourth color I would like to be for
> people who are end-of-line and the other side of cleaned/uncleaned.