Back

If your email is not recognized and you believe it should be, please contact us.

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Updating manual page no. references automatically? #71752
    James
    Member

    Ah yes, according to the explanation in the script:

    “This InDesign CS3/CS4 JavaScript is intended to perform operations on found numbers. It uses the find/change Grep functions
    to find numbers within either the entire document, or just the selection. You can select to search for just numbers with
    a specific character style, and/or a prefix character.

    This script was written by Steve Wareham at stevewareham.com based on an idea by David Blatner at indesignsecrets.com”

    Oh well, not to worry! ;)

    in reply to: Updating manual page no. references automatically? #71751
    James
    Member

    Thank you for the additional replies chaps.

    Yes, I’m waiting to upgrade to a new shiny new machine that with Adobe CC installed. This current project will likely be one of the last I work on using CS2. It has served me well for 8 years or so! ;)

    David, thank you for linking the NumberAdjuster script. I gave it a try on a quick test document, but an error is thrown after clicking the ‘OK’ button – ‘Object does not support the property or method ‘findGrepPreferences’, which I assume indicates the script is not compatible with CS2. However, even if it does work, I cannot see how to update just the references with ‘page nn’, and not all numbers, as the wildcard only accepts single characters.

    So, it looks like I will be updating this document ‘by hand’, with the help of the Find/Replace dialogue box.

    Thank you for your suggestions!

    in reply to: Updating manual page no. references automatically? #71729
    James
    Member

    Thank you Alan.

    I am already preparing myself to use the Find/Replace function, with the following strings:

    page 150 –> page 152
    page 149 –> page 151
    page 148 –> page 150

    etc.

    I realised that it’s necessary to perform such an operation in reverse to prevent ‘double-adding’!

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)