Thanks Paul. You're right, that does work. However it begs the question
of why bother to bring up the database selection dialogue in the initial
Mail Merge panel - especially given that it doesn't actually work?
IMHO the Edit | Exchange Database menu item is a travesty that should be
removed. Instead the database selection dialogue in the Mail Merge panel
should be used at run time to select the database/query rather than just
the specific records.
I will further note that having to go through arcane gyrations to change
the query is also nuts. A common use case to have multiple different
queries that can be associated with a specific form letter. Each query
would be given a meaningful name and the secretary / office
administrator who is responsible for the getting the letters out selects
the appropriate one.
Again, this functionality appears to be present in the Mail Merge panel
but doesn't work.
Or to put it in more direct terms, the database/query selection should
be part of the mail merge operation, not part of the document
definition. The document should contain simply the database field name.
On 14/10/16 11:20 AM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
In my circumstance, I am copying over an old database to a new one and
changing the name. Then I add new data to the new database. After that
I update the query to access the new data only.
I copy over to a new database as a way to remove old records (data)
and keep Base from losing it when it has to many records. No data lost
and old data is stored away.
In every case, in Writer, from the menu <Edit><Exchange Database>, I
select the new database and select the new query. All fields update
appropriately except <new record> which I do manually.
As I understand it, if you are not changing database or fields. You
should be able to just update your query to select the records you want.
Hope this helps.
On 10/13/2016 4:46 PM, Gary Dale wrote:
On 12/10/16 11:00 AM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
I'm using a Base database (pasted the data in from a spreadsheet so I
could run queries that were apparently too complex for simple
conditional text). The field names haven't changed. If they did, then
I would expect that I'd have to update the merge document.
Are the field names identical from original to newer data?
Are you creating new/updated queries?
I'm always switching to new single source databases from boilerplate
Writer and haven't had a problem. I have not tried multiple sources
Also beware that while the fields may update to the new data, <next
record> has to be applied manually. (Seems to be true in most
versions of LibreOffice).
When I View | Field Names (ctrl-F9), I not only see the database name
for both the old database (in the fields that I haven't updated
manually) and the new database (in the fields that I did re-insert to
this year's database) but also the name of the query that was used.
This is absurd. The form letter should just contain the name of the
fields and let the user select which database and/or query they wants
to use. As it stands, I am apparently required to not only stick with
the same database but also keep the same query name.
Even the menu item (Field Names) seems to be poorly thought out.
Toggling it switches the view from just the Field Names to the full
database, query, Field Names. In both cases I see Field Names. It
probably should be named "Query Path" - although as I have stated,
the document shouldn't even use that information.
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted