Compound Criteria for Search Text Field of Rule

[Thomas M.]

Outlook 2007

I need to create a rule that will be triggered when string A *and* string B
are both found in the body of a message. If I select the "with specific
words in the body" option and enter multiple strings into the Search Text
dialog box, those strings get separated by an "or" automatically.

Is there a way to change the "or" to "and" so that the rule will only be
triggered with BOTH strings appear in the body of the message?

Thanks for any help that you can offer!

--Tom

 

[Brian Tillman [MVP - Outlook]]

I need to create a rule that will be triggered when string A *and* string
B are both found in the body of a message. If I select the "with specific
words in the body" option and enter multiple strings into the Search Text
dialog box, those strings get separated by an "or" automatically.

Google is your friend. From September of 2006:
<http://groups.google.com/group/micr...g/46292dddbdfa4336?dmode=source&output=gplain>

 

[Thomas M.]

Brian,

Thanks for the reply. You're right, Google is my friend. Unfortunately, it
is sometimes hard to know what to Google on. I was trying things like,
"Compound rule criteria," "Advanced rule criteria," etc., and wasn't having
any luck.

At any rate, the link you provided was right on the money. I have two text
strings that will have unknown text between them. Your solution of using
two rules works beautifully. I am fortunate enough that one of the two
strings I need to pick up is unique enough that it is highly unlikely to
occur in the average email, and I've tighten down even further by keying on
the senders address.

What's great about your solution is that it can be expanded to many levels.
In my case, I needed only two rules to achieve my goal. But one can
envision a case where rule 1 categorizes the message, rule 2 categories the
rule further, and rule 3 takes the desired end action. Of course, I would
always strive to do it in as few steps as possible, but the point is that
the categories approach is capable of getting more sophisticated if needed.
It's a nice little trick to have up the sleeve.

Thanks for the help!

--Tom

 

[Brian Tillman [MVP - Outlook]]

What's great about your solution is that it can be expanded to many
levels. In my case, I needed only two rules to achieve my goal. But one
can envision a case where rule 1 categorizes the message, rule 2
categories the rule further, and rule 3 takes the desired end action. Of
course, I would always strive to do it in as few steps as possible, but
the point is that the categories approach is capable of getting more
sophisticated if needed. It's a nice little trick to have up the sleeve.

Thanks for the help!

I'm glad my solution works for you.