I assumed this. Hope it's right, otherwise as you said, things are much more complicated. I don't really want to get involved into something like this...Yincognito wrote: ↑July 28th, 2023, 7:22 pm Just a small note: this will work only if there are equal numbers of 001-..., 002-... and 003-... in their respective sets (hence my question about the logic of their amount),
You're perfectly right, my bad I missed this. But no, this detail doesn't complicate things too much in my opinion, but even simplifies them. The only difference is that the Formula option of the [MeasureNum2] measure should simplify. Something like this: Formula=(( MeasureNum2 + 1 ) % #MaxNum2# ) or Formula=(( MeasureNum2 + 1 ) % ( #MaxNum2#+ 1 )).Yincognito wrote: ↑July 28th, 2023, 7:22 pm Besides that, it appears that now the numerical part after the - starts from 0 and not 1 according to the OP, which, as you surely know, would probably involve some disabling and enabling of various measures (or, if things are relatively simple and don't involve dynamic change, using Loop measures instead, which would simplify things in a way).
EDIT: In the last sentence above, the red-marked second formula has been posted wrongly as Formula=(( MeasureNum1 = #MaxNum1# ) ? 1 : ( MeasureNum1 + 1 )). It should have been Something like this: Formula=(( MeasureNum2 + 1 ) % ( #MaxNum2# + 1 )). The eror has been fixed, but anyone reading my post before fixing it, could have been misled.
Apologize for my mistake.
Yincognito caught my attention. Many thanks to him.