> Only the sorting (of the entry mask!) is missing! :)

Ok, I put that on my wish list. So once the second or third person asks for it, I will
implement it (;-)

> > 'sort attributes' sorts the logbook entries when they are displayed.  Or?
> 
> Right
> 
> > What I want is to rearrange the entry mask.  E.g. if 'Entry type' article is
> > selected then the attributes 'Author', 'Journal', 'Title', and 'Year' 
> > should be listed first, as they are required for this bibtex entry type.
> > Is it possible with the current elogd version to also sort (rearrange) the 
> > attributes in the entry mask?  If yes, how?  
> 
> Attributes are shown in the order you specify them in the config file, so what about
> 
> Attributes = Entry type, Author, Journal, Title, Year     ???

Because for 'Entry type'='InProceedings' one needs:
'Author', 'Title', 'Booktitle', 'Year', 'Volume', 'Number'.
So, depending on the entry type that was chosen the entry mask should change,
with the required fields first and the not valid fields should not be shown
at all, which can nicely be done with the 'hidden attributes' config option.
Only the sorting (of the entry mask!) is missing! :)

> > > Playing with all the configuration possibilities I have one issue:
> > > I like to use the "Extendable options" but I can't combine them with 
> > > the "Conditional attributes".
> > 
> > That was never ment to work. But I found some time to implement it. If you
> > download elog255-4.exe from today it whould work. Let me know if you have
> > problems.
> 
Hello Stefan,

the changes I asked for, are working as requested. The extandable options are 
inserted into the correct line of the conditional attributes. 

  Thanks.

PS: While testing on a new demo logbook, I first made the mistake to declare 
both options, the first one and the related one as extendable. But I can imagine 
that this was really never ment to be implemented.

> 'sort attributes' sorts the logbook entries when they are displayed.  Or?

Right

> What I want is to rearrange the entry mask.  E.g. if 'Entry type' article is
> selected then the attributes 'Author', 'Journal', 'Title', and 'Year' 
> should be listed first, as they are required for this bibtex entry type.
> Is it possible with the current elogd version to also sort (rearrange) the 
> attributes in the entry mask?  If yes, how?  

Attributes are shown in the order you specify them in the config file, so what about

Attributes = Entry type, Author, Journal, Title, Year     ???

> > Could you implement a 'hide attribute' and 'sort attribute' config option?
> 
> I implemented it as 'hidden attributes = <list>' and 'sort attributes'.

'sort attributes' sorts the logbook entries when they are displayed.  Or?

What I want is to rearrange the entry mask.  E.g. if 'Entry type' article is
selected then the attributes 'Author', 'Journal', 'Title', and 'Year' 
should be listed first, as they are required for this bibtex entry type.
Is it possible with the current elogd version to also sort (rearrange) the 
attributes in the entry mask?  If yes, how?  

Thanks for your time.

If an attribute uses MOptions and is also extendable, clicking "Add 
<attribute name>" and entering a value adds the value to the MOptions, but 
does not put the value into the log entry. The log record has that 
attribute blank.
You have to go back into the record and edit it to put the new value in.

I have a logbook with an attribute that has a number of fixed values. I 
use MOptions to prevent typos when entering and allow multiple "keywords".
When searching the users can only search on one keyword.
Is there any way to search on multiple values (AAA|BBB|CCC)? If I do not 
use MOption, they can do this, but the users entering logs may mistype the 
keywords.

> > Playing with all the configuration possibilities I have one issue:
> > I like to use the "Extendable options" but I can't combine them with 
> > the "Conditional attributes".
> 
> That was never ment to work. But I found some time to implement it. If you
> download elog255-4.exe from today it whould work. Let me know if you have
> problems.

Thanks a lot for fixing this issue, especially as it was never planed. I will
test it on Monday afternoon and will give you a reply.