I am trying to print a load of Zweckform 4737 labels from a web page. From reading around it sounds like it's more robust to generate a PDF than to use print stylesheets.
There are various libraries out there in various languages for doing this...but unless your specific label is supported, you need to know the exact measurements of the label yourself. Unfortunately it seems the Zweckform 4737 is not widely supported. (I will be using a Ruby library at the end of the day, but that's by the by.)
I have looked online but I cannot find the Zweckform 4737's measurements. I know the basics: 29.6mm x 63.5mm, 3 per row, 27 per sheet. But I also need (I think) the sheet's left and bottom margins, and the horizontal gap between labels if any.
Does anyone know where I can find this information? Or should I simply trawl around office stationery shops looking for a pack of the labels and just measure them with a ruler?
Aimee Daniells showed me that the Open Office label wizard has all the information I need.
Thanks Aimee!
Related
I have a problem that I can't seem to get rid of.
When a customer of mine prints a specific QRP, he gets a "WARNING. This report may extend beyond the printer page margins. Text may be clipped, depending on the printer in use. Do you wish to continue?"
While of course in no way critical, it's a problem due to the sheer number of prints per day this customer has, having to confirm this dialog every time.
I've had this issue before and seemed to be able to fix it by setting the report format to "Custom", but I've recently updated the QRP and the problem is back despite being still set to "Custom". I have also tried A4 (which is the printer's standard page format) and A5, to no avail.
Is there maybe a way to suppress this error in code?
The report itself is way smaller than A4 (it's an A5 format packaging label) so there is no way it would lead to any problems with the print margins, and the prints do come out perfectly fine.
You can use the constant RPT_PrintNoWarn along with SalReportPrint function. The constant is used for suppressing warnings about margin overflow and tiled pages.
It can be combained with constant RPT_PrintNoErrors using pipe symbol.
SalReportPrint ( hWndFrm, strTemplate, strVariables, strInputs, nCopies, RPT_PrintNoWarn|RPT_PrintNoErrors, nFirstPage, nLastPage, nErr )
I'm using the MS Graph API to expand children for their name and downloadURL. This is working very well:
/path/?$expand=children($select=name,content.downloadUrl)
I want to increase the page size from the default 200 to 999 (or whatever max size it will allow). Reading the MS Graph docs, I learned that I can use $top=(int) to change the max page size.
I've tried this:
/path/?$expand=children($top=999&$select=name,content.downloadUrl)
And this:
/path/?$expand=children($select=name,content.downloadUrl;top=999)
But neither of these solutions work. I also tried replacing top=999 with something smaller like top=3, but that doesn't work either and always returns 200 children. It's as if the "top" isn't even applied.
Any help for this? Thanks!
You cannot control the page size in $expand. Expand should be used for situations where you want a sample set of the underlying data rather than the complete data set. It's generally best to think of it as a quick way to get the first page of data.
More importantly, you really don't want a REST API to give you "whatever the max size". HTTP may be super flexible but it is not optimal for moving large payloads and, as a result, performance will be horrible.
For optimal performance, you should try to keep your page sizes around 100 records (smaller is better) and processing each page of data as you receive it.
I employ a snippet to get the number of child elements, returning an integer:
[[!getChildCount? &id=`12345`]]
Depending on the result of this (zero or greater than zero), I want to load two different chunks into my website. Here is my "Modx-Pseudocode" of what I would like to achieve. Been fiddling for hours now and just can't find out about the right syntax. This is what I'd like to write inside the content field:
[[!If [[!getChildCount? &id=`45`]] > 0
then=`[load_chunk_A]`
else=`[load_chunk_B]`]]
Any hints of how this is properly expressed in Modx revolution?
Seems you are talking about IF extra that you should install, if you haven't already done it, to achieve your goal.
[[!If?
&subject=`[[!getChildCount? &id=`45`]]`
&operator=`>`
&operand=`0`
&then=`[[!$chunk_A]]`
&else=`[[!$chunk_B]]`
]]
I know that attachments can be short:true or short:false, but it seems to me that even when they're short:false there is still a maximum length which is shorter than the regular length of a message.
Can this be controlled?
Thanks.
I know this is an old question, but it was high on my GOOG results today, so thought I'd post my solution here.
Short version - I stopped using attachments and put everything in the text.
Long version - my use case was using the color-bar on attachments to display info/warn/error info, but ultimately the line-wrap was making it less useful. The alternative is to set the sender name and icon_emoji to indicate that info, and simply put the log data in the text. For my case, we don't have log data longer than the 4k limit, or else I'd use a files.upload approach to get text snippets.
Hope this helps!
You mean character width? This seems to be 78 characters (80 less 2 characters for the coloured bar?)
Unfortunately no, you do not seem to be able to change the width (at time of writing). You can resort to text which is full width.
short is for side by side fields only, not the entire attachment.
Also see Slack Attachment Width and Wrapping Issues
This is an idea I got in to my mind,
All the display devices(screens which have pixels etc...) have an upper bound for the amount of various images they can generate.
as an example 1024*728 - 32 bit pixel display can only show (2^32)^(1024*768) etc... number of identical frames without duplicating any scene(view).
funny thing is, It's like we could pre generate all the films all the windows we have ever seen in our lives through screens etc...
the question here is can anybody use this abstract idea to create something useful? :D
You're talking of a number about
(2^32)^(1024*768) ~~ ((2^4)^8)^(10^6) ~~ 10^8^(10^6) ~ 10^8000000.
The number of atoms in universe is about
10^80 // http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe#Matter_content
I think that there is no way we could pre-generate all the screens in our life.
Let me formulate another question. From a number this big, what can we do to reduce it? How to aggregate similar pictures in order to reduce the complexity?
Another nice question is: what kind of data structure we need to store all this information? Suppose we reduce the number of similar images to 10^10. What kind of structure can handle so many different kinds of pictures in an efficient way?
So given some extra information about the scenes you could generate you might be able to pull apart the scenes that no-one has ever seen.
So if you could take all the pictures out on the internet and the statistics about what was popular or viewed a lot then compute your all possible screens you could pull apart that was not viewed much.
With some basic rules about complexity of the image you might be able to come up with images that have not been seen before. Think 80% flesh tones might produce something coupled with a variance to show range might render people naked. :-)
Of course the computation of such an idea is vastly outside our potential. 2^32^(1024*768) is in the superexponential range which is outside the bounds of reality. I tried to compute it in ruby, and it just died. It would have been fun if it had actually worked. :-)