Ritt, Stefan

Doe, John

 Can you give me an example on how names an email addresses look in your case? If the email address has no fix relation to the real name, I personally find it much harder to find an email address on a Muserlist, since the real name is not shown there. I guess what you really want is a display of the email addres in the form

real name <email address>

then sort by real name. Right?

Ritt, Stefan

Doe, John

We currently have 24 users set up which, using a normal font size, takes 6 lines to display Museremail.  Having realname+emailaddress would double the space - a bit much for us but may suit other users. 

You ask about how our email addresses look.  These are very simple, e.g. John Smith's email address would be "JohnSmith@mycompany.co.uk".  The are some exceptions, e.g. one or two people have a middle initial,or have a department name as a suffix and some people have abbreviated names because that is how they are known, so John's brother Joseph, known as Joe, might be JoeSoap@mycompany.co.uk and one or two users have a different domain.  So the ordering looks a bit odd sometimes, e.g.:

* StanleySmith@mycompany.co.uk * StellaEvans@mycompany.co.uk * StephenJones@mycompany.co.uk * StephenSmith@myothercompany.co.uk

* SterlingGold@mycompany.co.uk * SteuartEvans@mycompany.co.uk  * SteveSmythe@mycompany.co.uk * SylviaJones@mycompany.co.uk ...

where Steve Smythe has shifted down the ranks because of the abbreviation. 

However, the main reason for the request was that the I was so pleased with the ordering introduced in 2.7.5 but, as it is more normal for me  to look down a list of names ordered by last-name/first-name than the other way about, I thought it worth asking if there was any way to do this sensibly.  I appreciate that it isn't simple and what suits me may well not suit others - so thanks for taking time to consider the possibilities.  I guess the only real solution is to define users differently, e.g. by structuring the name data into first name(s) and last name (not a global solution but would suit most of western europe and the USA at least!) but that is bound to have lots of impacts both on the application and on existing setups - so not really feasible, and probably not worth the disruption.

regards

Steve

 That's correct. Adding first name(s), last name(s) requires major modifications which are not se easy and I don't have time for that in the moment. So we'll keep it for the time being.

 That's fine.  Thanks for listenening - and for keeping on with elog

regards

Steve

 I would like to be able to substitute some attribute values when an entry is duplicated. I don't see Subst on Duplicate available in the cfg file syntax. Can you add that?

Thanks

Subst on Duplicate does not make sense. Subst always works after you submit an entry, while Preset works before you enter the entry. When you Duplicate an entry, it looks like a new one, just with attributes and text from another entry. So when you submit that one, the system cannot distinguish if you entered a new one by yourself or if this is based on a copy of another entry. So what you probably need is Preset on duplicate.

Thanks for explaining.

I thought Preset would work with Duplicate since Duplicate creates a new entry, but it didn't. Then I tried Subst because Duplicating an entry opens it in Edit mode, so you are in effect Duplicating, and then Editing the entry. It just didn't occur to me to look for Preset on Duplicate.

When doing a Select->Edit operation, if an attribute has a type of "numeric" and the records selected already have (some) values for that attribute, then the "- keep original values -" message that is inserted to indicate that the values should be preserved causes the type check to fail.

Would it be possible to modify the Javascript that carries out the type check to treat the "- keep original values -" message as an exception?