Also, look at the file, it should be all readable ASCII except for printer codes, if
you work with your printer a lot you probably read those. If it is not, check that
the fonts are set to the ones the printed uses.
RRR
Jim Blackburn wrote:
> Frank Conroy wrote:
> > Many of you have suggested printing to a file, by which we assume you mean:
> >
> > OUTPUT filename
> > PRINT reportname
> > OUTPUT SCREEN
> >
> > We tried this: in fact, puzzled by the results, we have tried it with a lot
> > of different reports. WIth some, it works just fine; with others, and we
> > can't tell what the difference is between those that succeed and those that
> > fail, it will do one of the following:
> >
> > * print part of the report, but not all sections
> > * print two lines on top of each other (ie, it seems to print a line, then
> > in the same space prints the next line, so both show on the same screen
> > space)
> > * skip pieces of data: ie, in detail section, it may print 4 of 5 columns
> > of the data, but not the 5th.
>
> Reports in Windows just do these things. I have thought it was the translation from
>pixel-by-pixel output onto a line by line file. If you leave lots of space between
>fields, make sure that fields line up precisely on the horizontal pixels, etc. it
>minimizes or eliminates the problem.
>
> I would guess that missing sections could be gotten by increasing the number of
>vertical pixels in the sections.
>
> good luck with it,
> Jim Blackburn
> Kodiak
