The shorter expression in your original post:
not ( "DocIss" or "Internal" or "LP" or "LPvA" or "LPvB" or "LPvC" or "NoSeeEm"
or "SAS4vB" or "SAS4vC" or "TBP" or "WriterNote" ) or ( "SAS4" and ( "LPvB" or
"LPvC" ) ) and not ("TBP" or "Internal") or ( "SAS4vA" and ( "LPvB" or "LPvC"
) ) and not ("T
Which shorter expression? This one?
"LITEvA" and ( ( "LP" or "LPvA" or "LPvB" or "LPvC" or "SAS4" or "SAS4vA" or
"SAS4vB" or "SAS4vC" ) and not ( "Internal" or "TBP" ) ) and not (
"DocIss" or "NoSeeEm" or "WriterNote" )
Because it didn't work, although it's entirely probably I misunderstood
what
The shorter expression returns everything that is NOT tagged with
anything in the ( "DocIss" or ... "WriterNote") set, PLUS everything
that matches ("LITEvA" and (("LP" or ... or "SAS4vC") and not ("TBP"
or "Internal"))).
You might try running the first one through a utility that simplifies
logica
I wish. But my boss wants unstructured, so I'm sorta stuck.
At least the long expression works properly. I just wish I understood why
the shorter one (which to me looks logically the same) doesn't. Ah, well.
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Robert Lauriston
wrote:
> DocBook and DITA have a much
DocBook and DITA have a much more sophisticated approach to
conditional text. There are multiple profiling attributes that can
have multiple values. Thus the parameters you use when processing
output are simple and human-readable.
In my main docs, currently I use audience (public / internal) and
c
Carp. Back to not working for all the outputs I need. It worked (I
think) for the external documents but not for the internal ones. And if the
external stuff ever becomes IP specific, it won't work for that, either.
I'm beginning to wonder if I should have just created massive conglomerate
tags,
Heh.
Internal / External is the audience. Internal customers get proprietary
information that the external customers don't.
DocIss is for tracking tickets entered against documentation so that I know
who asked for a change and what the change was.
LP / SAS4 / LITE are the various IPs coming out of
You have four sets of conditions. What's the simplest logical
statement of how you want to apply them?
It's not clear to me why the Internal and DocIss sets are separate.
You don't want this?
"LITEvA"
AND ("LP" or ... "SAS4vC")
AND NOT ("TBP" or "Internal" or "DocIss" or "NoSeeEm" or "WriterNote
Would you believe:
"LITEvA" and not ( "Internal" or "TBP" )
works? So far, at least. I want to test a few more combinations. SHEEESH.
Someone told me I was supposed to be telling Frame what NOT to show, ergo
the
not ( "DocIss" or "Internal" or "LP" or "LPvA" or "LPvB" or "LPvC" or "NoSeeEm"
or "
OK, assuming you were telling me to create this expression:
"LITEvA" and ( ( "LP" or "LPvA" or "LPvB" or "LPvC" or "SAS4" or "SAS4vA" or
"SAS4vB" or "SAS4vC" ) and not ( "Internal" or "TBP" ) ) and not (
"DocIss" or "NoSeeEm" or "WriterNote" )
The answer is no, that doesn't work. For example, I
Might be. I'll have to try that. I thought I had, but maybe
not. I'll experiment and get back to you.
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Robert Lauriston
wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Lin Sims wrote:
> > ...This part of the expression is the same for both:
> >
> > not ( "DocIss" or
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Lin Sims wrote:
> ...This part of the expression is the same for both:
>
> not ( "DocIss" or "Internal" or "LP" or "LPvA" or "LPvB" or "LPvC" or
> "NoSeeEm"
> or "SAS4" or "SAS4vA" or "SAS4vB" or "SAS4vC" or "TBP" or "WriterNote" )
>
> and it's telling Frame not
If there is documentation about evaluation precedence, I haven't been able
to find it.
I'm not sure about your comments on needing more parenthesis or a missing
not. I have found that you can't nest these expressions too far (I think 3
levels is the maximum) because Frame completely crashes.
This
Is there any documentation of the precedence and order of evaluation
of FrameMaker's conditional tag logical operators?
I feel like the second one needs more parentheses and might be missing
a NOT. As written, it looks like it will show (1) everything with none
of the condition tags in the set tha
No one wants to tackle that wall o' text, huh? :)
How's this, then. Could someone explain why these two expressions don't
have the same effect, even though (to my eyes) they are logically identical?
This one works:
not ( "DocIss" or "Internal" or "LP" or "LPvA" or "LPvB" or "LPvC" or "NoSeeEm"
o
Does Frame have a limit on how long the expression can be? I know from
annoying experience that it has a limit on how many nested levels you can
have. Are there any other gotchas that I should be aware of?
-+ -+ -+ -+ -+ -+ -+ -+ -+ -+ -+ -+ -+ -+
The rest of this email is background info to give
16 matches
Mail list logo