|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| Welcome to Windows Vista Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find solutions with any problems, errors or issues you are experiencing with Windows Vista. The Vista forum also covers news and updates and has an extensive Windows Vista tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks. |
| |||||||
 |
| |
11-12-2007
| #1 (permalink) |
| | Re: Inconsistent behavior with color rules You are correct. If you want a given message to be processed by several rules in succession, then the "Stop processing" command is only used in the final rule for that item. I was addressing the general case where typically there is only one rule per message, in which case each rule must be terminated. -- Gary VanderMolen [MS-MVP WLM] "Milhouse Van Houten" <btvs@xxxxxx> wrote in message news:ueDi4FQJIHA.4592@xxxxxx Quote: > I'm confused now. Is this a new requirement in this WLM? And how would more > than one rule apply, which they often can and do? Again, I can see how that > pertains to certain types of rules, like the ones you described, but I > basically have several rules that all do the same thing: look for names and > color them. I could even stuff them all into one rule, but I don't for > clarity. So in this case, as far as I can tell it really doesn't make sense > at all to stop processing. > > "Gary VanderMolen" <gary@xxxxxx> wrote in message > news:Ob1jREOJIHA.588@xxxxxx Quote: >> All rules must be terminated by "Stop processing", or else you >> will get unpredictable results. >> >> -- >> Gary VanderMolen [MS-MVP WLM] >> >> >> "Milhouse Van Houten" <btvs@xxxxxx> wrote in message >> news:ucnI$5MJIHA.3636@xxxxxx Quote: >>> Purely news, and none have "Stop processing" -- they're all just look for >>> something in "From" and then apply the color. I know the order is >>> important in some cases, but in this case when they're all of the same >>> type and there's no "stop" -- and all the other ones work (because >>> they're for 3rd-parties), it can't be. Plus, these are the same rules I >>> had in WM, where it worked. >>> >>> "Ildhund" <jnllb@xxxxxx> wrote in message >>> news:OVIfEILJIHA.1208@xxxxxx >>>> Are you talking about mail rules or news rules? What other rules do you >>>> have operating, and in what order? Does the rule that is inconsistent >>>> include "Stop processing more rules"? Do the others, if any? I think >>>> you'll find that rules are pretty pedantic, so you have to be accurate >>>> in formulating them and ordering them to achieve the result you're >>>> aiming for. If another rule chips in to , say, move messages received on >>>> account a to folder b and stop processing more rules, and this rule is >>>> above your colouring rule in the hierarchy, then colours will not be >>>> applied. >>>> -- >>>> Noel >>>> >>>> "Milhouse Van Houten" <btvs@xxxxxx> wrote in message >>>> news:uLsKT9KJIHA.4272@xxxxxx >>>>> I have that checked all along. In terms of colors, I imagine that's >>>>> what is responsible for sometimes marking my messages red in color, but >>>>> like my rule, it's inconsistent. >>>>> >>>>> "Ron Sommer" <rsommer@xxxxxx> wrote in message >>>>> news:uBuuUmKJIHA.588@xxxxxx >>>>>> Tools, Options, Advanced, Mark threads that I start "Watched" >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Ronald Sommer. >>>>>> >>>>>> "Milhouse Van Houten" <btvs@xxxxxx> wrote in message >>>>>> news:uCFRrWJJIHA.4592@xxxxxx >>>>>>> I didn't see it because of the Subject line. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm in Vista but never installed the WLM beta. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This can't depend on addresses being in the address book (don't >>>>>>> forget, all my other rules work). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> When viewing this group today (I hadn't even closed the program from >>>>>>> yesterday) it decided to work (blue) when it wasn't working in any >>>>>>> group yesterday. Further, in another group, all my messages are >>>>>>> suddenly red, which is not from my rule, but (I believe) built-in >>>>>>> behavior within the program -- I actually recall seeing that happen >>>>>>> in OE and WM, too. If that worked consistently, I could eliminate my >>>>>>> rule, but it doesn't. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So bottom line is this seems random and unpredictable and I have no >>>>>>> idea what's going on. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Ron Sommer" <rsommer@xxxxxx> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:Oes9WHFJIHA.1188@xxxxxx >>>>>>>> I posted this problem Nov. 6 and didn't get any replies. >>>>>>>> Are you using XP or Vista? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Did you uninstall a WLM beta when you installed 1606? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Is btvs@xxxxxx your real address? I was wondering if maybe >>>>>>>> the address had to be in Contacts. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If I manually apply the rule, it works. >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Ronald Sommer >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Milhouse Van Houten" <btvs@xxxxxx> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:ueOMxmDJIHA.5468@xxxxxx >>>>>>>>> I'm on the release version and am seeing something I've never seen >>>>>>>>> in OE or WM: I've setup a rule to look for my email address in >>>>>>>>> "From" (I've also now added my name, even though it's redundant) >>>>>>>>> and to then highlight messages blue based on that. Pretty simple, >>>>>>>>> but it simply never works. I even tried manually applying it, >>>>>>>>> nothing. Rules done exactly the same way for others work, so what's >>>>>>>>> special about me? >>>>>>>> |
My System Specs |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
 Inconsistent Picture Preview Behavior | General Discussion | |||
| inconsistent behavior | PowerShell | |||
| Baffled by Inconsistent and Irrational Vista Backup Behavior | Vista performance & maintenance | |||
| ADSI Inconsistent behavior | PowerShell | |||
| Smart-quote behavior: Is current behavior ideal? | PowerShell | |||
