Differing Autocorrects in Word and Excel

[Ruth]

I've set up autocorrects in Word that, for example, superscript the 2 in cm2
and ft2. These work as formatted text, and the 2 is a true superscript.

Then I added autocorrects to Excel to print something similar, but since
Excel can't have formatted autocorrects, I used the small raised 2 that
appears in the symbol font.

The result is that these two applications print somewhat different looking
results. The raised 2 in the symbol font doesn't match a true superscripted
2. But I can live with this.

However, when I later edit the autocorrects in Excel -- this seems to be the
trigger -- the cm2 and ft2 in Word change to match the ones in Excel, which
means they don't match other scientific terms in Word. I assume this is
because the two programs share certain files, including the dictionary.

My question is: Is there a way to keep cm2 (and similar autocorrects)
different in Word and Excel, yet to be able to continue to update the
autocorrects?

 

[Elliott Roper]

I've set up autocorrects in Word that, for example, superscript the 2 in cm2
and ft2. These work as formatted text, and the 2 is a true superscript.

Then I added autocorrects to Excel to print something similar, but since
Excel can't have formatted autocorrects, I used the small raised 2 that
appears in the symbol font.

The result is that these two applications print somewhat different looking
results. The raised 2 in the symbol font doesn't match a true superscripted
2. But I can live with this.

However, when I later edit the autocorrects in Excel -- this seems to be the
trigger -- the cm2 and ft2 in Word change to match the ones in Excel, which
means they don't match other scientific terms in Word. I assume this is
because the two programs share certain files, including the dictionary.

My question is: Is there a way to keep cm2 (and similar autocorrects)
different in Word and Excel, yet to be able to continue to update the
autocorrects?

I'd never have thought of using autocorrect in Excel, especially with
numbers, but a quick experiment shows they share the autocorrect table.
At first blush, I'd say that snookers you plan, unless you want to use
different input strings in each. e.g. cm1 in Word and cm2 in Excel.

As a workaround, I found I could get acceptable results in both using
unicode 00B2 aka SUPERSCRIPT 2 from character palette, making the
autocorrect as unformatted text in Word, thus avoiding the lack of
formatted text in Excel's autocorrects.

This trick only works in Word 2004. v.X does not do Unicode.
Furthermore, for best looking results, you are limited to those unicode
fonts that have a 00B2. My beloved Garamond Premier Pro does not, so
Word substitutes the superscript 2 in Times New Roman, which passes
cursory inspection only.