Re: Annoying user interface issues: 100- and 10000000

Mark,
Are you using Explorer or Green on Black (eg Client Access).
If you are using Green on Black, the easy answer is to use the Field Minus
for negatives rather than Field Plus.  This comes down to training and then
more training.
As the local financials consultant I can say that figures over 10000000 are
not uncommon.
Explorer uses the GUI convention of highlighting for replacement all
characters, and I believe leading negative signs.
Good luck
Michael




"Mike Von Stein" <vonstein@wcoil.com> on 30/07/2000 10:29:15

Please respond to JBAUSERS-L@midrange.com
                                                              
                                                              
                                                              
  To:          JBAUSERS-L@midrange.com                        
                                                              
  cc:          (bcc: Michael Berman/JBA International/AU)     
                                                              
                                                              
                                                              
  Subject      Annoying user interface issues:   100-  and    
  :            10000000                                       
                                                              







current setting:  100-
desired setting: -100
Is there any kind of preference setting that controls the way negative #'s
are handled?   We have found that we need to put the negative sign *behind*
the number or it gets stripped and actually made *positive!*   (In our
geographic area, in front of the number is the convention.)  It still shows
you on the prompt that the "-" has been stripped, but many users are used
to hitting enter 2X fast and never see it.

Also, is there any way to prevent users who do not hit field-exit from
entering astronomical quantities.   Periodically we see scrap posted at
"10000000" or some rediculous quantity because of someone's typo when they
meant to have entered "1".  I suspect there's not, but I guess I can always
hope... :)

Thanks,
Mike Von Stein