200,000 word Word document

[Charl_from_Lexicon]

Hi there,

I use Word to write novels and I'm thinking about upgrading to a
MacBook. I currently use a 2004 iBook, with 1.25 gig of RAM, a 1.2
PowerPC processor, and Word for Mac v.X, and I find documents with a
word count over 50,000 freeze, crash and slow Word. But most novels
are 80,000 - 200,000 words long.

My questions are: how well would the latest MacBook, with a 2.16GHz
Intel Core 2 Duo processor, and a gig of RAM, handle a novel-sized
Word document? Could it display an 80,000 - 200,000 word count file,
without slowing or crashing? Would I need to upgrade to the 2 gigs of
RAM? Would upgrading to the latest version of Word be advisable, or
would Word v.X run faster?

I hope that's not too many questions. Thanks, in advance, for your
help.

Regards,

Charl

 

[Elliott Roper]

Hi there,

I use Word to write novels and I'm thinking about upgrading to a
MacBook. I currently use a 2004 iBook, with 1.25 gig of RAM, a 1.2
PowerPC processor, and Word for Mac v.X, and I find documents with a
word count over 50,000 freeze, crash and slow Word. But most novels
are 80,000 - 200,000 words long.

My questions are: how well would the latest MacBook, with a 2.16GHz
Intel Core 2 Duo processor, and a gig of RAM, handle a novel-sized
Word document? Could it display an 80,000 - 200,000 word count file,
without slowing or crashing? Would I need to upgrade to the 2 gigs of
RAM? Would upgrading to the latest version of Word be advisable, or
would Word v.X run faster?

I hope that's not too many questions. Thanks, in advance, for your
help.

You won't see a vast speed increase. Word is currently a Power PC
application. In order for it to run on an Intel Mac, all its innards
are squeezed through a PPC emulator built into Mac OS X called Rosetta.
That makes Word a bit of a slug on all but the most beefy Intel Macs.
Word 2004 on my 4 Gig of RAM 2.66 GHz quad Mac Pro is only a little bit
quicker than it is on this PowerBook G4 with 768MB and a single 1 GHz
processor.

Word 2004 is a lot more stable than v.X. Its typography and font
handling, while still barely acceptable, is far better than v.X. It
does long filenames properly too.

Unless you have money to burn, stick with what you have till the end of
this year. Word 2008 will run natively on Intel Macs, and I refuse to
believe there will not be a much better MacBook out by then. Put those
two together, and you are looking at a 10x speed improvement! The new
MS XML document format and the lack of that execrable visual basic muck
augurs well for reliability too.

200,000 word docs should be a breeze, even on your current machine.
I worked on a 500 page monster legal document for 4 years without
serious mishap, mostly using v.X. It had dual numbered paragraphs
(legal and section numbers) and well over 1000 footnotes by the time it
was finished.

There are a number of tricks for getting good performance out of Word
for long docs. Ask again with specifics about what brings on your
freezes and slowdowns.

 

[Charl_from_Lexicon]

Hi there,

Thanks for the excellent reply.

You won't see a vast speed increase. Word is currently a Power PC
application. In order for it to run on an Intel Mac, all its innards
are squeezed through a PPC emulator built into Mac OS X called Rosetta.
That makes Word a bit of a slug on all but the most beefy Intel Macs.
Word 2004 on my 4 Gig of RAM 2.66 GHz quad Mac Pro is only a little bit
quicker than it is on this PowerBook G4 with 768MB and a single 1 GHz
processor.

Ah, that's what I was afraid of. It's hardly worth upgrading until the
next Microsoft Office comes along.

Word 2004 is a lot more stable than v.X. Its typography and font
handling, while still barely acceptable, is far better than v.X. It
does long filenames properly too.

Does it have a keyboard shortcut for 'Paste Special'? I can't stand
the way Word tries to copy formatting of pasted words, when I only
want the text.

Unless you have money to burn, stick with what you have till the end of
this year. Word 2008 will run natively on Intel Macs, and I refuse to
believe there will not be a much better MacBook out by then.

Leopard will also be out. I'm looking forward to having Time Machine
and Stacks.

I've glanced around but I can't see an exact due month for Word 2008.
Just 'the second part of 2007'. I wonder if they intend to bring it
out around the same time as Leopard?

Put those

two together, and you are looking at a 10x speed improvement!

My jaw just hit the floor. I can't wait!

The new

MS XML document format and the lack of that execrable visual basic muck
augurs well for reliability too.

I wonder if doing a Save As HTML in the next Word will produce clean
HTML, instead of the shocking mess that is currently produced? Naaah,
too much to hope for! ;-)

200,000 word docs should be a breeze, even on your current machine.
I worked on a 500 page monster legal document for 4 years without
serious mishap, mostly using v.X. It had dual numbered paragraphs
(legal and section numbers) and well over 1000 footnotes by the time it
was finished.

Sounds like a beast of a document!

There are a number of tricks for getting good performance out of Word
for long docs. Ask again with specifics about what brings on your
freezes and slowdowns.

Thank you very much for your help.

I find my crashes most often happen when I click on a link in Document
Map in one of my large documents.

Regards,

Charl

 

[John McGhie]

Hi Charles:

I do long documents in Word for a living...

Word 2004 will go smoothly up to 560 pages of a complex technical document
(lots of tables, pictures, and cross-references). It should do 1,000 pages
of something simple like a novel without breaking a sweat.

However, you need to adopt "long document" work habits to enjoy the
experience. The main one is: use ONLY styles for your formatting.

1 GB of RAM is too light for serious document work, go to at least 2 GB.

Word does not write HTML, and never pretended to. It was "Marketing's" idea
to call it a "Web Page" because they have no clue. The output from Word is
actually XHTML (XML-enhanced HTML). That is because HTML simply cannot do
the job.

The brief was to render a Microsoft Word document into a markup language.
HTML won't DO that -- it hasn't got the commands for it. You have to use
XML, and XML is visually more complex than HTML.

That said, Word 2007 offers four flavours of markup language output: "Web
Page", "Web Page (Filtered)" .docx (OpenXML) and OpenDoc.

Web Page (Filtered) is closest to a normal web page. Data not supported by
HTML 4 is stripped from the file. Some users get a nasty shock if they try
to bring the result back into Word: the file does not contain enough
information to make a Word "document" out of it.

OpenXML is the richest of them: it is the native format for the next
versions of Mac Word and Word 2007. Obviously it can contain anything Word
can do (but I wouldn't put it on the Web, browsers can't handle it).

No, there's no keystroke for Paste as Text in Word 2004, but you can easily
make one. That keystroke is not needed in Word 2007, it has five parameters
you can set that govern its default behaviour when pasting: you can set it
to paste in Plain Text by default. I see no reason why that feature would
not be in Word 2008 on the Mac.

Cheers

Hi there,

Thanks for the excellent reply.


Ah, that's what I was afraid of. It's hardly worth upgrading until the
next Microsoft Office comes along.


Does it have a keyboard shortcut for 'Paste Special'? I can't stand
the way Word tries to copy formatting of pasted words, when I only
want the text.


Leopard will also be out. I'm looking forward to having Time Machine
and Stacks.

I've glanced around but I can't see an exact due month for Word 2008.
Just 'the second part of 2007'. I wonder if they intend to bring it
out around the same time as Leopard?

Put those

My jaw just hit the floor. I can't wait!

The new

I wonder if doing a Save As HTML in the next Word will produce clean
HTML, instead of the shocking mess that is currently produced? Naaah,
too much to hope for! ;-)


Sounds like a beast of a document!


Thank you very much for your help.

I find my crashes most often happen when I click on a link in Document
Map in one of my large documents.

Regards,

Charl

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Consultant Technical Writer
McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltd
http://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
Sydney, Australia. S33°53'34.20 E151°14'54.50
+61 4 1209 1410, mailto:[email protected]

 

[Elliott Roper]

Hi there,
Thanks for the excellent reply.

You raise some interesting further questions. Read the interstitial
remarks below:-

Ah, that's what I was afraid of. It's hardly worth upgrading until the
next Microsoft Office comes along.

It seems to be the right choice in your situation.

Does it have a keyboard shortcut for 'Paste Special'? I can't stand
the way Word tries to copy formatting of pasted words, when I only
want the text.

No, but everybody assigns a keyboard shortcut to a simple macro for
that. No self-respecting plagiarist should be without one. Copy mine if
you wish:
Sub PasteUnformatted()
'
' PasteUnformatted Macro
' Macro recorded 13-08-2004 by Elliott Roper
'
Selection.PasteSpecial Link:=False, DataType:=wdPasteText,
Placement:= wdInLine, DisplayAsIcon:=False
End Sub

Watch the line breaks. "Selection...False" is a single line. It is
probably easier to record your own. Assigning the keyboard shortcut is
a little easier.

Leopard will also be out. I'm looking forward to having Time Machine
and Stacks.

Me too. The most important changes will be inside, particularly for
developers. Core Data and Core Audio are awesome. It looks like there
will be full support for Python and Ruby from the revised Cocoa
Frameworks, and I'm still hoping there will be a new zfs file system,
despite the denials of the rumours. It means us peasants will be served
with deliciously cooked applications sooner rather than later.

I've glanced around but I can't see an exact due month for Word 2008.
Just 'the second part of 2007'. I wonder if they intend to bring it
out around the same time as Leopard?

I don't think anybody knows yet. Given that Vista took 5 years, and
they are calling it Office 2008, patience is called for. With Leopard
delayed, I can't see Office coming any sooner, since it would be dumb
to release it before it is tested thoroughly against Leopard.

My jaw just hit the floor. I can't wait!

Heh! I guess not everything will be 10x, but I bet compute intensive
stuff like re-justifying in page view will be. It can't come soon
enough for me. Word 2004 on a quad G5 with two 30" screens, showing 8
pages at a time has given me a taste for what the native one will be
like.

I wonder if doing a Save As HTML in the next Word will produce clean
HTML, instead of the shocking mess that is currently produced? Naaah,
too much to hope for! ;-)

Believe it or not, that shocking mess is deliberate. It is a common
misconception that Word's html is meant for the web. It is not. It is
intended to transfer clean documents that only Word can eat.
The new XML will fill that role. Whether there is going to be a
webbified html in the new one is still open.

Sounds like a beast of a document!

Oh yes! It was one of the most expensive documents in recorded history.
I'm not allowed to.....

Thank you very much for your help. A pleasure!
I find my crashes most often happen when I click on a link in Document
Map in one of my large documents.

Ah yes! Document Map is notoriously unstable. I would not touch it with
a barge pole. If you must, back up everything first, do Document Map
on a copy, then throw away the copy.
There is one excellent unrelated housekeeping trick you might follow.
At intervals, copy all of your book, except for the last pilcrow, into
a new document then go on using the new one. That final paragraph mark
is the outward and visible sign of inner and spiritual corruption. Many
of a document's warts and mis-steps accumulate in the data structures
behind it.

 

[Charl_from_Lexicon]

You raise some interesting further questions. Read the interstitial
remarks below:-



It seems to be the right choice in your situation.

It also gives me more time to save up, which works out well.

No, but everybody assigns a keyboard shortcut to a simple macro for
that. No self-respecting plagiarist should be without one.

Heh, I actually have to plagiarize my own work, if that makes any
sense. Because I can't fit the entire 120,000 on one document without
it crashing, if I want to bring earlier text forward, it's Paste
Special from another document.

Copy mine if

you wish:
Sub PasteUnformatted()
'
' PasteUnformatted Macro
' Macro recorded 13-08-2004 by Elliott Roper
'
Selection.PasteSpecial Link:=False, DataType:=wdPasteText,
Placement:= wdInLine, DisplayAsIcon:=False
End Sub

Watch the line breaks. "Selection...False" is a single line. It is
probably easier to record your own. Assigning the keyboard shortcut is
a little easier.

*slaps forehead* That's what I've needed all these years! Thanks so
much!

I just assigned Paste Special to the keyboard. Now I love my Apple Key
+ E!

Me too. The most important changes will be inside, particularly for
developers. Core Data and Core Audio are awesome. It looks like there
will be full support for Python and Ruby from the revised Cocoa
Frameworks, and I'm still hoping there will be a new zfs file system,
despite the denials of the rumours. It means us peasants will be served
with deliciously cooked applications sooner rather than later.

Good!

Does it worry you that Office 2008 apparently has "30 million lines of
code"? I read that and thought, 'Uh oh, software bloat.'

I've glanced around but I can't see an exact due month for Word 2008.

Office timing snipped. I hope they don't keep us waiting too long.

Heh! I guess not everything will be 10x, but I bet compute intensive
stuff like re-justifying in page view will be. It can't come soon
enough for me. Word 2004 on a quad G5 with two 30" screens, showing 8
pages at a time has given me a taste for what the native one will be
like.

Wow! Word processing heaven!

Believe it or not, that shocking mess is deliberate. It is a common
misconception that Word's html is meant for the web. It is not. It is
intended to transfer clean documents that only Word can eat.
The new XML will fill that role. Whether there is going to be a
webbified html in the new one is still open.

I wish you'd tell that to the people who submit Word HTML to websites
and mess up their CSS. Sorry, that's HTML but not real HTML you can
actually use on the web! ;-)

I don't understand Microsoft's reasoning. To transfer documents,
surely doc format is sufficient? Surely HTML should be kept nice and
simple, for use on the web?

Ah yes! Document Map is notoriously unstable. I would not touch it with
a barge pole. If you must, back up everything first, do Document Map
on a copy, then throw away the copy.

Unfortunately, I NEED Document Map. That's how I keep track of
everything. At a glance, I can see where chapters start and finish. I
can get to where I need to go in a single click. Or I can most of the
time, when it doesn't crash.

Yes, sometimes Document Map corrupts documents. But I save versions as
I go (nearly 190 draft versions by now, someone would be able to
animate the writing of the entire novel) so I just go back to my
previous version, where Document Map is working.

There is one excellent unrelated housekeeping trick you might follow.
At intervals, copy all of your book, except for the last pilcrow, into
a new document then go on using the new one. That final paragraph mark
is the outward and visible sign of inner and spiritual corruption. Many
of a document's warts and mis-steps accumulate in the data structures
behind it.

I don't have any pilcrows.

Thanks again for your excellent advice!

Regards,

Charl

 

[Charl_from_Lexicon]

Hi Charles:

Hi there,

It's Charl, short for Charlotte.

I do long documents in Word for a living...

Word 2004 will go smoothly up to 560 pages of a complex technical document
(lots of tables, pictures, and cross-references). It should do 1,000 pages
of something simple like a novel without breaking a sweat.

Unfortunately, my G4 iBook can't handle it. Word becomes very
unstable on documents over 50,000 words.

However, you need to adopt "long document" work habits to enjoy the
experience. The main one is: use ONLY styles for your formatting.

I do use styles, because the headings appear in Document Map.

Other than the headings, I don't use any formatting apart from caps.

1 GB of RAM is too light for serious document work, go to at least 2 GB.

Thanks for the tip. I'll get a MacBook with 2 gig of RAM.

Word does not write HTML, and never pretended to. It was "Marketing's" idea
to call it a "Web Page" because they have no clue. The output from Word is
actually XHTML (XML-enhanced HTML). That is because HTML simply cannot do
the job.

I wish they had a 'formatting free' HTML style. Just the paragraphs,
maybe some italics or bold.

The brief was to render a Microsoft Word document into a markup language.
HTML won't DO that -- it hasn't got the commands for it. You have to use
XML, and XML is visually more complex than HTML.

That said, Word 2007 offers four flavours of markup language output: "Web
Page", "Web Page (Filtered)" .docx (OpenXML) and OpenDoc.

Web Page (Filtered) is closest to a normal web page. Data not supported by
HTML 4 is stripped from the file. Some users get a nasty shock if they try
to bring the result back into Word: the file does not contain enough
information to make a Word "document" out of it.

Thanks for the tip.

OpenXML is the richest of them: it is the native format for the next
versions of Mac Word and Word 2007. Obviously it can contain anything Word
can do (but I wouldn't put it on the Web, browsers can't handle it).

No, there's no keystroke for Paste as Text in Word 2004, but you can easily
make one. That keystroke is not needed in Word 2007, it has five parameters
you can set that govern its default behaviour when pasting: you can set it
to paste in Plain Text by default. I see no reason why that feature would
not be in Word 2008 on the Mac.

Oh, excellent! I'm looking forward to that! I looked in vain for Paste
Special by default in the settings.

Thanks for the advice!

Regards,

Charl

 

[Gary Goldberg]

Hi there,

It's Charl, short for Charlotte.



Unfortunately, my G4 iBook can't handle it. Word becomes very
unstable on documents over 50,000 words.

Interesting because I created a nearly 100,000 word file on Word 98
using a G3/250 Powerbook (at one point I upgraded the CPU to G4/500,
but can't remember if that was before or after this file). Anyway, I had
no problems editing this file (which was straight text, with no graphics
and little formatting

 

[John McGhie]

Sorry Charl:

Unfortunately, my G4 iBook can't handle it. Word becomes very
unstable on documents over 50,000 words.

Mine could, and did, constantly De-corrupt that document! (Copy
everything EXCEPT the last paragraph mark, and paste it into a fresh new
document). Or: Save as a "Web Page", close it, re-open the web page
version, and save back as a .doc.

Now you have found ONE of the reasons they provided "Complex HTML" otherwise
known as XHTML as an output format. Warning: Do NOT be tempted by "Web
Page (Filtered) -- it will strip out a lot of the information Word needs to
rebuild the file back into .doc format

And, of course, Word never did anything to HTML. Word writes fully
W3C-compliant HTML4. But a Word document is far, far more complex than a
web page. You've forgotten all those graphics and fields and equations and
citations and .... Blah that users put into Word documents None of
those can be described in HTML -- the language just won't do it.

I do use styles, because the headings appear in Document Map.

I am sure you use styles, however, if you didn't, your "headings" would
still appear in Document Map. Which is a reason why we recommend that
professional users stay well clear of Document Map. Word "invents" headings
and assigns "Outline Levels" to them so they will appear in Document Map.

Document Map works off Outline Level, not Style Name. But that's probably
why your document is crashing: Document Map really screws up the internal
structure of the file. Stay away from it if you are working on big
documents.

Use Outline View instead. Outline View is also far more powerful than
Document Map. Outline View is one of the "tradesman" tools built in for
professional users

Other than the headings, I don't use any formatting apart from caps.

Yeah, I know. However, Document Map would have wrecked the internal
structure of the document. From there, you need to de-corrupt to get it
back to working right.

Thanks for the tip. I'll get a MacBook with 2 gig of RAM.

Yep. I did The LED backlights in the MacBook Pro are seriously tasty.
But after agonising for some weeks, I just could not give myself a leave
pass to go toyshopping for a MacBook Pro when the MacBook is half the price
and only about three per cent slower. Not even for the back-lit keyboard


Elliott knows I am telling the truth: he was there at the time -- for
immoral support!!

I wish they had a 'formatting free' HTML style. Just the paragraphs,
maybe some italics or bold.

Well, they have. It's available from Expression Web. Seriously: Word is
the world's best word-processor. That means it is NOT the world's best HTML
editor. The Army would not be impressed if you started remodelling their
machine guns so they were more environmentally friendly -- and *I* will be
seriously annoyed if you screw up the tool I use to earn my living by trying
to turn it into a web editor. If you need a Mac web editor, give the folks
at Dream Weaver a call Use the correct tool for the job, and stop
trying to turn Word into a Crescent Wrench

Oh, excellent! I'm looking forward to that! I looked in vain for Paste
Special by default in the settings.

Word>Preferences>Edit>Cut and Paste...

You can't make "Paste special" the default, but you can control what "Paste"
does. Make sure you enable "Show paste options buttons". You will then get
a little Floatie toolbar each time you paste that enables you to determine
how you want to paste this item. If you disable "Place formatted text on
the clipboard" you can disable formatting text transferring from another
application.

Hope this helps

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Consultant Technical Writer
McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltd
http://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
Sydney, Australia. S33°53'34.20 E151°14'54.50
+61 4 1209 1410, mailto:[email protected]

 

[little_creature]

Sorry Charl:




Mine could, and did, constantly De-corrupt that document! (Copy
everything EXCEPT the last paragraph mark, and paste it into a fresh new
document). Or: Save as a "Web Page", close it, re-open the web page
version, and save back as a .doc.

Now you have found ONE of the reasons they provided "Complex HTML" otherwise
known as XHTML as an output format. Warning: Do NOT be tempted by "Web
Page (Filtered) -- it will strip out a lot of the information Word needs to
rebuild the file back into .doc format

And, of course, Word never did anything to HTML. Word writes fully
W3C-compliant HTML4. But a Word document is far, far more complex than a
web page. You've forgotten all those graphics and fields and equations and
citations and .... Blah that users put into Word documents None of
those can be described in HTML -- the language just won't do it.



I am sure you use styles, however, if you didn't, your "headings" would
still appear in Document Map. Which is a reason why we recommend that
professional users stay well clear of Document Map. Word "invents" headings
and assigns "Outline Levels" to them so they will appear in Document Map.

Document Map works off Outline Level, not Style Name. But that's probably
why your document is crashing: Document Map really screws up the internal
structure of the file. Stay away from it if you are working on big
documents.

Use Outline View instead. Outline View is also far more powerful than
Document Map. Outline View is one of the "tradesman" tools built in for
professional users




Yeah, I know. However, Document Map would have wrecked the internal
structure of the document. From there, you need to de-corrupt to get it
back to working right.





Yep. I did The LED backlights in the MacBook Pro are seriously tasty.
But after agonising for some weeks, I just could not give myself a leave
pass to go toyshopping for a MacBook Pro when the MacBook is half the price
and only about three per cent slower. Not even for the back-lit keyboard


Elliott knows I am telling the truth: he was there at the time -- for
immoral support!!


Well, they have. It's available from Expression Web. Seriously: Word is
the world's best word-processor. That means it is NOT the world's best HTML
editor. The Army would not be impressed if you started remodelling their
machine guns so they were more environmentally friendly -- and *I* will be
seriously annoyed if you screw up the tool I use to earn my living by trying
to turn it into a web editor. If you need a Mac web editor, give the folks
at Dream Weaver a call Use the correct tool for the job, and stop
trying to turn Word into a Crescent Wrench


Word>Preferences>Edit>Cut and Paste...

You can't make "Paste special" the default, but you can control what "Paste"
does. Make sure you enable "Show paste options buttons". You will then get
a little Floatie toolbar each time you paste that enables you to determine
how you want to paste this item. If you disable "Place formatted text on
the clipboard" you can disable formatting text transferring from another
application.

Hope this helps

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here:http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Consultant Technical Writer
McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltdhttp://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
Sydney, Australia. S33°53'34.20 E151°14'54.50
+61 4 1209 1410, mailto:[email protected]

Hello, as the thread become so long I might overlook, just in case It
hasnßt been already said:
you do not need to assign macro for paste special, you can assign
keyboard shortcut via Tools>customize keyboard>edit:find
editpastespecial

 

[John McGhie]

Hi Little Creature:

You wouldn't get "lost" if I could persuade you to Top Post (g, d, & r r r)
You are correct: however, that command will get you only a dialog
"asking" you how you want to paste.

In Word VBA there is a little-known "secret": if you name a macro to match
the name of the Word command (as listed in the list of Word Commands) and
store that macro in the user's Normal template, the macro will replace the
Word command.

Remove the Macro and the Word built-in command reverts automatically.
That's one of the more useful features we will lose when we lose VBA...

However, when you want to do a "Paste Special", chances are you want a
specific pasting method. In this user's case, he wants to paste as plain
text, and only as plain text.

For example, if he names the macro "EditPasteSpecial()" and stores it in the
Normal template, it will replace the command. Whenever he uses Edit>Paste
Special..., regardless of whether he invokes it by keystroke or by menu
choice, the macro will run.

However, that may not be exactly what he needs, because then, he never will
be able to access Edit>Paste Special without removing the macro.

In which case, his simplest method is to create a macro that explicitly
pastes as Plain Text, and assign a keystroke to that. Then the user has the
choice of pasting normally, pasting as plain text, or pasting some other way
using Edit>Paste Special.

Given that this is one of a user's most commonly used functions, I think it
is important that we think through the whole problem and provide a complete
solution

Cheers

Hello, as the thread become so long I might overlook, just in case It
hasnßt been already said:
you do not need to assign macro for paste special, you can assign
keyboard shortcut via Tools>customize keyboard>edit:find
editpastespecial

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Consultant Technical Writer
McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltd
http://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
Sydney, Australia. S33°53'34.20 E151°14'54.50
+61 4 1209 1410, mailto:[email protected]

 

[little_creature]

Hello John,
Thanks for adding your experiences to help provide complete solution

You wouldn't get "lost" if I could persuade you to Top Post (g, d, & r r r)

You all should have said that if you prefer top posting. That's no problem.
I will try to improve myself. I'm used that my collegues say the things
straightly. But this I do not understand (g, d, & r r r).

Generally,
I understand that each of us has adopted slightly different workflow and do
things in different way. Sometimes I cannot see the other possibilities as
I'm used to my workflow, which I thought that is the only one .

Honestly it's the same like I have clearidea what 10dkg is, where as rought
idea how much 0.5 pound is and vice versa is true for most UK people.

 

[Clive Huggan]

Without wanting to attract too many comments from fervent followers of top
or bottom posting, this is what many of the "regulars" have adopted in this
discussion group over a period of time:

1. If you are giving the first reply, top-post (and others try to keep it
that way).

2. If it's better to insert responses throughout a long original post, do
that.

3. If bottom-posting has been established by others by the time you get
involved, keep doing that.

The preference for top-posting by John McGhie and others who answer a large
number of posts on several discussion groups each day arises from saving
time and mouse movements through not having to scroll right down to the
bottom. They (as do most of the regulars, including me) use Entourage or
specialized NNTP news-reader applications.

Whichever way it's done:

4. Snipping out unnecessary previous discussion is appreciated.

But as I said, there are many different views on this.

Clive
======

 

[Phillip Jones]

This is the exact method I use here.
Though I prefer top posting in this type newsgroup, for the very reason
John McGee does. in a Help scenario top posting is perfect.

But I follow the exact guideline you have outline. Although I am not
good about sniping because I never know what is necessary or not

Without wanting to attract too many comments from fervent followers of top
or bottom posting, this is what many of the "regulars" have adopted in this
discussion group over a period of time:

1. If you are giving the first reply, top-post (and others try to keep it
that way).

2. If it's better to insert responses throughout a long original post, do
that.

3. If bottom-posting has been established by others by the time you get
involved, keep doing that.

The preference for top-posting by John McGhie and others who answer a large
number of posts on several discussion groups each day arises from saving
time and mouse movements through not having to scroll right down to the
bottom. They (as do most of the regulars, including me) use Entourage or
specialized NNTP news-reader applications.

Whichever way it's done:

4. Snipping out unnecessary previous discussion is appreciated.

But as I said, there are many different views on this.

Clive
======

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, CET |LIFE MEMBER: VPEA ETA-I, NESDA, ISCET, Sterling
616 Liberty Street |Who's Who. PHONE:276-632-5045, FAX:276-632-0868
Martinsville Va 24112 |[email protected], ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet
------------------------------------------------------------------------

If it's "fixed", don't "break it"!

mailto[email protected]

<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/90th_Birthday/index.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Fulcher/default.html>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Harris/default.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Jones/default.htm>

<http://www.vpea.org>