Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Grouped Field Numbers

What is the correct way to deal with Apportonment documents similar to
Llandyfaelog, Carms No 62, (the last one) ?

Comments

  • Page 62
    I have changed 1194 to 1209 to a single grouping.
    This is the order in which I did it.
    In the document I changed the field no. from 1194 to 1209 to 1194 to make sure there was a link to the single field number 1194 on the map.

    Clicked to see were it was and check that all the remaining fields up to 1209 would be in one block not spread out.

    On the map deleted all the separate field numbers highlighted from 1195 to 1209.

    On the map highlighted field 1194 and added the remaining fields up to 1209 to this area so I ended up with all the fields in one big block.

    Box top left changed the Field number to 1194 to 1209.

    In the document changed the field number to 1194 to 1209.

    As you have noticed the names of the field numbers in the highlight must be identical to the field number in the document to link the map to the document.
    Hope this helps for any more groupings in the document.
    Regards
    Wynne
  • Wynne,

    Many thanks for your clear explanation of how the grouping of a large number of Field Numbers can be tackled.

    Will you be doing the others, starting at 1392 to 1399, and so on?

    There is of course no linkage when the word "to" appears in the Field Number column.

    I asked the question because I have seen the same thing on some other sheets.

    Colin
  • Sorry to contradict but there is a linkage between map and document of non-numerical characters as long the map transcription of field name and document transcription of field name are absolutely identical
    eg 1392 to 1399 (with to in the middle)
    Wynne
Sign In or Register to comment.