Folks - I'm out of ideas regarding how to insert a calculated future date.
I've tried:
1. using date fields in a formula (nested fields); all I can get using this
approach is an incremented year, despite use of date format switches.
2. using a reference to a bookmarked current date and incrementing it.

Perhaps giving up caffeine is taking its toll; it seems this would be a
fairly common task? Has anyone done this?

Thanx, Tim

This is a sad gap in Word's field functionality. The only real solution is
to write a macro to do it. VBA has DateAdd() and DateDiff() functions for
date calculations. It is theoretically possible using fields (hunt around
for posts from a creature called Macropod) -- entertaining if you enjoy
Julian number calculations, but not reliable for serious use.




"Tim Wallin" wrote in message
...
Folks - I'm out of ideas regarding how to insert a calculated future date.
I've tried:
1. using date fields in a formula (nested fields); all I can get using
this
approach is an incremented year, despite use of date format switches.
2. using a reference to a bookmarked current date and incrementing it.

Perhaps giving up caffeine is taking its toll; it seems this would be a
fairly common task? Has anyone done this?

Thanx, Tim

Thanks! I write macros frequently but had not used those functions.

"not reliable for serious use"

Really? I'm sure this would be a revelation to every astronomer on planet
earth.

Maybe you've got julian day number calculations confused with the Julian
calendar or so-called julian dates that combine year number and year-day
numbers into a string. Perhaps you should check out:
http://www.tondering.dk/claus/cal/calendar26.html
and find out how this stuff *really* works.




"Jezebel" wrote in message
...
This is a sad gap in Word's field functionality. The only real solution is
to write a macro to do it. VBA has DateAdd() and DateDiff() functions for
date calculations. It is theoretically possible using fields (hunt around
for posts from a creature called Macropod) -- entertaining if you enjoy
Julian number calculations, but not reliable for serious use.




"Tim Wallin" wrote in message
...
Folks - I'm out of ideas regarding how to insert a calculated future
date.
I've tried:
1. using date fields in a formula (nested fields); all I can get using
this
approach is an incremented year, despite use of date format switches.
2. using a reference to a bookmarked current date and incrementing it.

Perhaps giving up caffeine is taking its toll; it seems this would be a
fairly common task? Has anyone done this?

Thanx, Tim






---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004

Nothing wrong with Julian number calculations as such, Macro. Problem is,
your sort of field coding represents a kind of back-door programming, that
CANNOT deliver reliable results. Research it. The problems are
well-documented.

Cheers
j



"macropod" wrote in message
...
"not reliable for serious use"

Really? I'm sure this would be a revelation to every astronomer on planet
earth.

Maybe you've got julian day number calculations confused with the Julian
calendar or so-called julian dates that combine year number and year-day
numbers into a string. Perhaps you should check out:
http://www.tondering.dk/claus/cal/calendar26.html
and find out how this stuff *really* works.




"Jezebel" wrote in message
...
This is a sad gap in Word's field functionality. The only real solution
is
to write a macro to do it. VBA has DateAdd() and DateDiff() functions
for
date calculations. It is theoretically possible using fields (hunt
around
for posts from a creature called Macropod) -- entertaining if you enjoy
Julian number calculations, but not reliable for serious use.




"Tim Wallin" wrote in message
...
Folks - I'm out of ideas regarding how to insert a calculated future
date.
I've tried:
1. using date fields in a formula (nested fields); all I can get
using
this
approach is an incremented year, despite use of date format switches.
2. using a reference to a bookmarked current date and incrementing
it.

Perhaps giving up caffeine is taking its toll; it seems this would be
a
fairly common task? Has anyone done this?

Thanx, Tim






---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004

Seems to me you're changing your story Jezebel.

Previously (in another thread), you claimed julian number calculations per
se are unreliable, which is completely untrue. You started of in this thread
with the same theme. Now you say my "field coding represents a kind of
back-door programming, that CANNOT deliver reliable results". Equally untrue
and amply demonstrated to be so by my implementation.

Don't confuse steep learning curves with unreliability. The mere fact that
you can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done...



"Jezebel" wrote in message
...
Nothing wrong with Julian number calculations as such, Macro. Problem is,
your sort of field coding represents a kind of back-door programming, that
CANNOT deliver reliable results. Research it. The problems are
well-documented.

Cheers
j



"macropod" wrote in message
...
"not reliable for serious use"

Really? I'm sure this would be a revelation to every astronomer on
planet
earth.

Maybe you've got julian day number calculations confused with the Julian
calendar or so-called julian dates that combine year number and year-day
numbers into a string. Perhaps you should check out:
http://www.tondering.dk/claus/cal/calendar26.html
and find out how this stuff *really* works.




"Jezebel" wrote in message
...
This is a sad gap in Word's field functionality. The only real
solution
is
to write a macro to do it. VBA has DateAdd() and DateDiff() functions
for
date calculations. It is theoretically possible using fields (hunt
around
for posts from a creature called Macropod) -- entertaining if you
enjoy
Julian number calculations, but not reliable for serious use.




"Tim Wallin" wrote in message
...
Folks - I'm out of ideas regarding how to insert a calculated future
date.
I've tried:
1. using date fields in a formula (nested fields); all I can get
using
this
approach is an incremented year, despite use of date format
switches.
2. using a reference to a bookmarked current date and incrementing
it.

Perhaps giving up caffeine is taking its toll; it seems this would
be
a
fairly common task? Has anyone done this?

Thanx, Tim






---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004






---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004

Gentlemen, Gentlemen play nice :-)

--
Greg Maxey/Word MVP
A Peer in Peer to Peer Support

macropod wrote:
Seems to me you're changing your story Jezebel.

Previously (in another thread), you claimed julian number
calculations per se are unreliable, which is completely untrue. You
started of in this thread with the same theme. Now you say my "field
coding represents a kind of back-door programming, that CANNOT
deliver reliable results". Equally untrue and amply demonstrated to
be so by my implementation.

Don't confuse steep learning curves with unreliability. The mere fact
that you can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done...



"Jezebel" wrote in message
...
Nothing wrong with Julian number calculations as such, Macro.
Problem is, your sort of field coding represents a kind of back-door
programming, that CANNOT deliver reliable results. Research it. The
problems are well-documented.

Cheers
j



"macropod" wrote in message
...
"not reliable for serious use"

Really? I'm sure this would be a revelation to every astronomer on
planet
earth.

Maybe you've got julian day number calculations confused with the
Julian calendar or so-called julian dates that combine year number
and year-day numbers into a string. Perhaps you should check out:
http://www.tondering.dk/claus/cal/calendar26.html
and find out how this stuff *really* works.




"Jezebel" wrote in message
...
This is a sad gap in Word's field functionality. The only real
solution is to write a macro to do it. VBA has DateAdd() and
DateDiff() functions for date calculations. It is theoretically
possible using fields (hunt around for posts from a creature
called Macropod) -- entertaining if you
enjoy
Julian number calculations, but not reliable for serious use.




"Tim Wallin" wrote in message
...
Folks - I'm out of ideas regarding how to insert a calculated
future date. I've tried:
1. using date fields in a formula (nested fields); all I can get
using this approach is an incremented year, despite use of date
format
switches.
2. using a reference to a bookmarked current date and
incrementing it.

Perhaps giving up caffeine is taking its toll; it seems this
would be a fairly common task? Has anyone done this?

Thanx, Tim






---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004






---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004

Hi Greg,

Just getting a bit fed up with this Jezebel character spouting off about
the supposed unreliability of something he/she obviously doesn't understand.
My work in this area has been good enough for O'Reilly Media Inc to publish
in their recent "Word Hacks" (see Chapter 8, Forms and Fields) - I wonder
what Jezebel's had published.

Cheers


"Greg Maxey" gro.spvm@yexamg (thats my e-mail address backwards) wrote in
message ...
Gentlemen, Gentlemen play nice :-)

--
Greg Maxey/Word MVP
A Peer in Peer to Peer Support

macropod wrote:
Seems to me you're changing your story Jezebel.

Previously (in another thread), you claimed julian number
calculations per se are unreliable, which is completely untrue. You
started of in this thread with the same theme. Now you say my "field
coding represents a kind of back-door programming, that CANNOT
deliver reliable results". Equally untrue and amply demonstrated to
be so by my implementation.

Don't confuse steep learning curves with unreliability. The mere fact
that you can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done...



"Jezebel" wrote in message
...
Nothing wrong with Julian number calculations as such, Macro.
Problem is, your sort of field coding represents a kind of back-door
programming, that CANNOT deliver reliable results. Research it. The
problems are well-documented.

Cheers
j



"macropod" wrote in message
...
"not reliable for serious use"

Really? I'm sure this would be a revelation to every astronomer on
planet
earth.

Maybe you've got julian day number calculations confused with the
Julian calendar or so-called julian dates that combine year number
and year-day numbers into a string. Perhaps you should check out:
http://www.tondering.dk/claus/cal/calendar26.html
and find out how this stuff *really* works.




"Jezebel" wrote in message
...
This is a sad gap in Word's field functionality. The only real
solution is to write a macro to do it. VBA has DateAdd() and
DateDiff() functions for date calculations. It is theoretically
possible using fields (hunt around for posts from a creature
called Macropod) -- entertaining if you
enjoy
Julian number calculations, but not reliable for serious use.




"Tim Wallin" wrote in message
...
Folks - I'm out of ideas regarding how to insert a calculated
future date. I've tried:
1. using date fields in a formula (nested fields); all I can get
using this approach is an incremented year, despite use of date
format
switches.
2. using a reference to a bookmarked current date and
incrementing it.

Perhaps giving up caffeine is taking its toll; it seems this
would be a fairly common task? Has anyone done this?

Thanx, Tim






---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004






---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004

I have decided to take this one offline. Reply sent to your e-mail address
provided here. If it is bogus, and you want to receive you have mine.

Congratulations on the published work. Do you have a link?


--
Greg Maxey/Word MVP
A Peer in Peer to Peer Support

macropod wrote:
Hi Greg,

Just getting a bit fed up with this Jezebel character spouting off
about the supposed unreliability of something he/she obviously
doesn't understand. My work in this area has been good enough for
O'Reilly Media Inc to publish in their recent "Word Hacks" (see
Chapter 8, Forms and Fields) - I wonder what Jezebel's had published.

Cheers


"Greg Maxey" gro.spvm@yexamg (thats my e-mail address backwards)
wrote in message ...
Gentlemen, Gentlemen play nice :-)

--
Greg Maxey/Word MVP
A Peer in Peer to Peer Support

macropod wrote:
Seems to me you're changing your story Jezebel.

Previously (in another thread), you claimed julian number
calculations per se are unreliable, which is completely untrue. You
started of in this thread with the same theme. Now you say my "field
coding represents a kind of back-door programming, that CANNOT
deliver reliable results". Equally untrue and amply demonstrated to
be so by my implementation.

Don't confuse steep learning curves with unreliability. The mere
fact that you can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done...



"Jezebel" wrote in message
...
Nothing wrong with Julian number calculations as such, Macro.
Problem is, your sort of field coding represents a kind of
back-door programming, that CANNOT deliver reliable results.
Research it. The problems are well-documented.

Cheers
j



"macropod" wrote in message
...
"not reliable for serious use"

Really? I'm sure this would be a revelation to every astronomer
on planet earth.

Maybe you've got julian day number calculations confused with the
Julian calendar or so-called julian dates that combine year number
and year-day numbers into a string. Perhaps you should check out:
http://www.tondering.dk/claus/cal/calendar26.html
and find out how this stuff *really* works.




"Jezebel" wrote in message
...
This is a sad gap in Word's field functionality. The only real
solution is to write a macro to do it. VBA has DateAdd() and
DateDiff() functions for date calculations. It is theoretically
possible using fields (hunt around for posts from a creature
called Macropod) -- entertaining if you
enjoy
Julian number calculations, but not reliable for serious use.




"Tim Wallin" wrote in message
...
Folks - I'm out of ideas regarding how to insert a calculated
future date. I've tried:
1. using date fields in a formula (nested fields); all I can
get using this approach is an incremented year, despite use of
date format
switches.
2. using a reference to a bookmarked current date and
incrementing it.

Perhaps giving up caffeine is taking its toll; it seems this
would be a fairly common task? Has anyone done this?

Thanx, Tim






---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004






---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004

Your offensiveness and asinine debating tricks don't trouble me in the
least. It's a pity you don't put your ingenuity to some useful purpose. Your
'field hacks' are very clever, but to suggest that they are a useful way to
set up Word documents on which people can rely is disingenuous to say the
least. Your 'implementation' doesn't demonstrate anything except the fact
that you obviously haven't tested it very thoroughly. (If you had, one would
expect a little humility from you ... )





"macropod" wrote in message
...
Seems to me you're changing your story Jezebel.

Previously (in another thread), you claimed julian number calculations per
se are unreliable, which is completely untrue. You started of in this
thread
with the same theme. Now you say my "field coding represents a kind of
back-door programming, that CANNOT deliver reliable results". Equally
untrue
and amply demonstrated to be so by my implementation.

Don't confuse steep learning curves with unreliability. The mere fact that
you can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done...



"Jezebel" wrote in message
...
Nothing wrong with Julian number calculations as such, Macro. Problem
is,
your sort of field coding represents a kind of back-door programming,
that
CANNOT deliver reliable results. Research it. The problems are
well-documented.

Cheers
j



"macropod" wrote in message
...
"not reliable for serious use"

Really? I'm sure this would be a revelation to every astronomer on
planet
earth.

Maybe you've got julian day number calculations confused with the
Julian
calendar or so-called julian dates that combine year number and
year-day
numbers into a string. Perhaps you should check out:
http://www.tondering.dk/claus/cal/calendar26.html
and find out how this stuff *really* works.




"Jezebel" wrote in message
...
This is a sad gap in Word's field functionality. The only real
solution
is
to write a macro to do it. VBA has DateAdd() and DateDiff()
functions
for
date calculations. It is theoretically possible using fields (hunt
around
for posts from a creature called Macropod) -- entertaining if you
enjoy
Julian number calculations, but not reliable for serious use.




"Tim Wallin" wrote in message
...
Folks - I'm out of ideas regarding how to insert a calculated
future
date.
I've tried:
1. using date fields in a formula (nested fields); all I can get
using
this
approach is an incremented year, despite use of date format
switches.
2. using a reference to a bookmarked current date and
incrementing
it.

Perhaps giving up caffeine is taking its toll; it seems this would
be
a
fairly common task? Has anyone done this?

Thanx, Tim






---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004






---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004

Hi Greg,

Requested link: http://safari.oreilly.com/0596004931

Cheers


"Greg Maxey" gro.spvm@yexamg (thats my e-mail address backwards) wrote in
message ...
I have decided to take this one offline. Reply sent to your e-mail
address
provided here. If it is bogus, and you want to receive you have mine.

Congratulations on the published work. Do you have a link?


--
Greg Maxey/Word MVP
A Peer in Peer to Peer Support

macropod wrote:
Hi Greg,

Just getting a bit fed up with this Jezebel character spouting off
about the supposed unreliability of something he/she obviously
doesn't understand. My work in this area has been good enough for
O'Reilly Media Inc to publish in their recent "Word Hacks" (see
Chapter 8, Forms and Fields) - I wonder what Jezebel's had published.

Cheers


"Greg Maxey" gro.spvm@yexamg (thats my e-mail address backwards)
wrote in message ...
Gentlemen, Gentlemen play nice :-)

--
Greg Maxey/Word MVP
A Peer in Peer to Peer Support

macropod wrote:
Seems to me you're changing your story Jezebel.

Previously (in another thread), you claimed julian number
calculations per se are unreliable, which is completely untrue. You
started of in this thread with the same theme. Now you say my "field
coding represents a kind of back-door programming, that CANNOT
deliver reliable results". Equally untrue and amply demonstrated to
be so by my implementation.

Don't confuse steep learning curves with unreliability. The mere
fact that you can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done...



"Jezebel" wrote in message
...
Nothing wrong with Julian number calculations as such, Macro.
Problem is, your sort of field coding represents a kind of
back-door programming, that CANNOT deliver reliable results.
Research it. The problems are well-documented.

Cheers
j



"macropod" wrote in message
...
"not reliable for serious use"

Really? I'm sure this would be a revelation to every astronomer
on planet earth.

Maybe you've got julian day number calculations confused with the
Julian calendar or so-called julian dates that combine year number
and year-day numbers into a string. Perhaps you should check out:
http://www.tondering.dk/claus/cal/calendar26.html
and find out how this stuff *really* works.




"Jezebel" wrote in message
...
This is a sad gap in Word's field functionality. The only real
solution is to write a macro to do it. VBA has DateAdd() and
DateDiff() functions for date calculations. It is theoretically
possible using fields (hunt around for posts from a creature
called Macropod) -- entertaining if you
enjoy
Julian number calculations, but not reliable for serious use.




"Tim Wallin" wrote in message
...
Folks - I'm out of ideas regarding how to insert a calculated
future date. I've tried:
1. using date fields in a formula (nested fields); all I can
get using this approach is an incremented year, despite use of
date format
switches.
2. using a reference to a bookmarked current date and
incrementing it.

Perhaps giving up caffeine is taking its toll; it seems this
would be a fairly common task? Has anyone done this?

Thanx, Tim






---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004






---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.799 / Virus Database: 543 - Release Date: 19/11/2004