Graham, at 01:16 28/10/2001, you wrote: >Hi Garry, > >lat one before I go to bed ! > >Kiwiz Syndicate wrote: > > > > Another point that needs clarification: > > It is not 'half page' but split page, wrongly named IMHO. > > The only time +PAGE is left out is when a 300 name page is split into > two files. The > > +PAGE is omitted on the first file only. A rare occurence I'm told. > >Dave wrote on the admins list > > I used the term "half page". I should have said "part transcribed > > page". > > > >so I think we are in agreement about the wording of half page :) Sorry to milk this even further, but it seems to me there are four distinct scenarios. 1) If someone starts transcribing a page from the 1st entry and completes it to the last entry - in which case there should be a +PAGE,n [n = page number] in the first line of the file and a +PAGE, (n+1) in the last line of the file. 2) If someone starts transcribing a page from the 1st entry, and closes the file before completing the transcription of that page, there should be a +PAGE,n in the first line of the file and no +PAGE at all at the end of the file. 3) If someone starts transcribing a page from an entry other than the first one and completes the page to the last entry, there should be no +PAGE,n in the first line of the file but there should be a +PAGE,(n+1) in the last line of the file. 4) If someone starts transcribing a page from an entry other than the first one and closes the file before completing the page to the last entry, there should be no +PAGE lines at all, either at the beginning or the end of the file. Is this a correct understanding? ( I am assuming that there is a maximum of one page per file - this understanding does not allow for there being a complete page, between two other +PAGE lines, in the middle of the file). Stephen Revd S H Carter [email protected] United Benefice of Coalbrookdale, Ironbridge and Little Wenlock http://www.rectorshouse.freeserve.co.uk/benefice/benframe.html