Printer file - revisited

[Dennis Malen]

Nancy,

Thanks for your clarification. I agree, that it may have been confusing to 
some. The whole issue of printer file and printer type hopefully is 
clarified to everyone's satisfaction.

If someone is still confused please bring it up on the list.

We have only been able to clarify this issue because of the interaction of 
many people, not just one.

Thanks again, Nancy.

Dennis

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nancy Palmquist" <nlp at vss3.com>
To: "Fplist (E-mail)" <filepro-list at lists.celestial.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 9:26 AM
Subject: Re: Printer file - revisited


> Kenneth Brody wrote:
>
>> Quoting Dennis Malen (Tue, 29 Mar 2005 18:53:04 -0500):
>> [...]
>>
>>>If I have printer type "nocodes" somewhere in the processing table must
>>>I conditionally bypass that statement and just use "printer file" without
>>>using the additional "printer type" that you suggested (I assume that's
>>>the case in order to get print codes back into the file). The other way
>>>is to take advantage of the parameters of the printer that is defined in
>>>the report format or must I redefine a printer type so that the print
>>>codes are embedded in the file to be saved on the disk.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> Once again, PRINTER FILE has zero effect on which print codes are being
>> used.  It was your PRINTER TYPE "nocodes" which caused the output to not
>> have ny print codes.  (And it was the execution of the PRINTER TYPE
>> statement, not merely its existence, that did it.)
>>
>> You don't have to do anything regarding your PRINTER TYPE "nocodes", but
>> you have to remember that if you execute it, filePro will do as you tell
>> it and not use any print codes.
>
> I have watched this discussion and think it needs one bit of 
> clarification.  There has been much talk about about a printer type of 
> "nocodes".  I do want to add that this refers to an actual printer code 
> table that has been created in the list of printer types. Traditionally, 
> this table will have all the codes blanked on the entire table, thus 
> producing an output with no codes.
>
> But I do want to warn you that if the table exists, it is possible for 
> users to add codes to the table or simply create it in such a way that it 
> has codes.
>
> I guess what I want to make sure users understand is that using the type 
> "nocodes" simply indicates that that is the table you have referenced. It 
> does not mean that we are assured that you actually did not insert codes. 
> FilePro does not understand it as a special table that means put in no 
> codes.  It is a table like HP-500 or hplaser1 and if it has codes they 
> will be used.
>
> As I watched this discussion, I had the impression that the references to 
> a printer type of "nocodes" was interpreted by some as indicating that 
> filePro would behave or react in some special way.  IT will not.
>
> I would suggest that using this table as we all do and leaving it with no 
> actual codes, makes discussion clearer, but really it is in no way an 
> assurance of convention.
>
> Nancy
>
> -- 
> Nancy Palmquist MOS & filePro Training Available
> Virtual Software Systems Web Based Training and Consulting PHONE: (412) 
> 835-9417    Web site:  http://www.vss3.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
>
>
>