OK...I'm getting there....this is good so far. One last question:
I'd like to have the downstream topics within a hierarchy
automatically appear at the end of a topic. At the bottom of the
style Title would be all the H1s until the next occurannce of the
style Title. At the bottom of the style H1 would be all the H2s until
the next occurance of an H1, and at the bottom of H2 would be all the
H3s that occur until the next occurance of the next H2.
Am I asking for too much?
--- "Jeremy H. Griffith" <jeremy at omsys.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 08:58:24 -0700 (PDT), John Posada
> <jposada01 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Hi, guys...I'm using Mif2Go (Version 3.3, Update 46) to convert to
> >HTML for the first time...I've been using it to convert to Word
> >years. I've defined it to split at two headings, but it names them
> >with system names.
> >I'd like to have it name each htm file with something
> >like the heading text as the file name.
> You can do that. You can also use a marker of type FileName.
> The hazard is that you can easily set two files to have the
> same name, resulting in the second one produced overwriting
> the first. This is hard to diagnose when it happens... and
> if you are giving names that are not guaranteed unique like
> the ones we generate, that is "when" and not "if". ;-)
> >I tried finding it in the help, but couldn't. Anyone give me a
> The User's Guide has close to 7000 index entries, among
> them "FileName", which refers you to par. 27.7.3, "Using
> custom markers to name split and extract files". For the
> method using para format properties, see par. 126.96.36.199,
> "Constructing file names based on paragraph content".
> That method is marked as "deprecated" purely as a warning;
> it's way easier to create name conflicts automatically
> with it. Actually, we always maintain back compatibility,
> so you can use it safely (aside from the conflict problem).
> >BTW...so far, the results are superb. I love the new batch file
> >installation, and it can only get better from here.
> Thank you! Yes, we have quite a few plans for making it
> better. We recently added Eclipse Help, for example, and
> some more surprises are coming soon. ;-)
> BTW, you may wonder why we use a simple .bat for install
> rather than an install program. It's for transparency.
> Many of our biggest customers are in defense, where you
> just don't want to run a program that may try to call
> home, make secret registry settings, or put files where
> your policies don't permit them. With our .bat, the IT
> folks can see exactly what will happen, and adjust the
> instructions as needed to comply with their policies.
> -- Jeremy H. Griffith, at Omni Systems Inc.
> <jeremy at omsys.com> http://www.omsys.com/
Senior Technical Writer
"So long and thanks for all the fish."