Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ptsfa!ames!elroy!cit-vax!oberon!pollux.usc.edu!kurtzman
From: kurtzman@pollux.usc.edu.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hypercard
Subject: Re: hypercard thoughts
Message-ID: <4911@oberon.USC.EDU>
Date: Thu, 29-Oct-87 17:09:44 EST
Article-I.D.: oberon.4911
Posted: Thu Oct 29 17:09:44 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 31-Oct-87 19:46:50 EST
References: <2014@umd5.umd.edu>
Sender: nobody@oberon.USC.EDU
Reply-To: kurtzman@pollux.usc.edu (Stephen Kurtzman)
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 16

In article <2014@umd5.umd.edu> zben@umd5.umd.edu (Ben Cranston) writes:
>I've had problems trying to get the
>FIND command to work.  I haven't quite pinned the problem down exactly, 
>but it seems that a FIND directed at a field on one background can in some
>cases be satisfied with the same data occuring in another field on another
>background, as long as the field numbers matched.  As a work around, I
>create the same list of fields in each background, but with the unused fields
>in each background set invisible.  Anybody seen anything like this?

The definition of the find command uses a field number. It is my guess that
if you specify a field name, it just substitutes in the field number
corresponding to the name. I have had the same problem and I solved it the
same inelegant way. My suggestion to the hypertext developers is to add
a background specifier to the find command. Example:

                    find target in field n on background m