inconsistent color definitions

Hi heather,

I'm just writing a script, that is searching and analysing colors.

So, where can we look to find which colors are being used? Mine are: 1 - no error; 2 - no error/no non-black; 3 - no error; 4 - no error; 5 - error; 6 - error; 7 - no error, multiple instances of non-black text; 8 - no error/no non-black; 9 - error for 2 colors, only one instance of non-black; 10 - no error.

This script also can tell you where these colores are used.

Could you please send me a document (ore more), where colors go crazy?

I'd like to analyse it to send you the results.

Frame assumed the first document was the accurate one and color definitions in subsequent documents should match the first document

It's always seems to me that's how it works, much the same thing as when Frame signals problems with conditions: it's not saying there's a problem with document 2, just that there's a discrepancy between the first place it found something defined and a different definition it's found later – it can be that document 1 is in fact set up just the way you want it.

Time-consuming, but if you start from View > Colour definitions and try deleting colours you're sure you don't want, you'll get a warning "Some items in {file} are assigned the colour {colour}". Save to .mif, find out where the offending colour is assigned, make necessary changes, repeat till done … If/when you get a new warning about "Colour separation out of range", post again here so I can learn from wiser answers.

> If you save a problem file as .mif and examine it (carefully, because .mif files can be a bit sensitive) in a text editor, you can search for the string "Color8" and find out exactly where the colour is being used.

That only works in the easy cases. If the named color is coming in with an external object (EPS, DWG, DXF, PDF) the name may or may not appear in the <ColorCatalog> tags, but you won't be able to find it in the main <TextFlow>.

I used the same template for every single document in my book. How can it be defined differently? Mine has this for both color 8 & 9. The only color I'm using is defined as blue. There is no instance of two colors being used. The one that lists both colors as inconsistent, only has one instance of non-black text, and that is the blue. Janet, there is no earlier version of these files. These were created from a template, all the same template, and copy and pasted over from the Adobe Acrobat. I have 10 files. Four are throwing this error, with one of them naming 2 colors, as specified above.

I realize that the template may have some problem with color #8. The guy who created these doesn't seem to know much about sensible formatting or naming conventions. He also said that FM doesn't have templates a bare 4 1/2 months ago, then suddenly had templates available a month or so later. The question from me is:

Why is this being thrown as an error in some of the files that are using the blue, but not all of them, given that they are all created with the same template. I'm assuming that it's the hyperlink blue, because there are no other colors in-use in the files. Three other files use the same font definition, but don't have errors.

So, where can we look to find which colors are being used? Mine are: 1 - no error; 2 - no error/no non-black; 3 - no error; 4 - no error; 5 - error; 6 - error; 7 - no error, multiple instances of non-black text; 8 - no error/no non-black; 9 - error for 2 colors, only one instance of non-black; 10 - no error.

I see no logic behind this configuration. The first file created was either 2 or 3. Next was either 3 or 4, then either 4 or 5; 2, 3, and 4 have non-black text. Why would 5 throw and error, if neither 3 nor 4 do. I'm going to delete the color, since it's not in 7, which is an ungodly huge file. We'll see what happens, but your explanations aren't making sense, given what I'm seeing here.