Mail Merged Documents NOT Actually Printing ONLY Selected Pages

[Ronald R. Dodge, Jr.]

Windows XP Pro, SP3
MS Word 2002, SP3

After merging the format document and the data source into one document, it
gives the option to either print or go into edit mode. I went into edit
mode just to verify things are right.

Yes, I know within the source list, I could select, but initially thought
since things didn't print out just right for the 2nd page of labels, I would
be able to tell the program to print out only page 2. Here's the symptoms
that I had saw and it took place on multiple computers as well as with
multiple printers with the only commonality being this specific situation of
mail merge no matter which computer the tasks were performed on and no
matter which printer the print job was sent to.

Go to Printer dialog box and select to print only page 2.
Click on OK.
Word shows it being sent to the printer.
Task bar in the tray area shows the printer icon for a short period of time
indicating the print request being carried out.
Go to the printer itself, there is no job going to it at all, thus no
printer out either. No error messages. Just acts like it never received
the job.

Now, if I tell it to print out ALL pages
Click on OK
Word shows it being sent to the printer
Task bar in the tray area shows the printer icon for a short period of time,
though a bit longer cause of more pages
Go to the printer itself, all pages are printed out as requested.

--
Thanks,

Ronald R. Dodge, Jr.
Production Statistician
Master MOUS 2000

 

[CyberTaz]

Most likely because when you're dealing with a document produced by a merge
each recipient's copy is a separate SECTION. If you want to print only a
certain section it needs to be specified when you print. Try entering p1s2
(assuming the section is one page long) in the print dialog.

Alternatively you can select the range of text to be printed & choose
SELECTION in the print dialog.

HTH |:>)
Bob Jones
[MVP] Office:Mac

 

[Ronald R. Dodge, Jr.]

Thank you for the reply as using that worked. I had no idea of that
happening, but I guess I will just have to remember that for future
references, which in this case happens to be using the following:

p1s<Page#>

Not really intuitive as far as I can tell.

--
Thanks,

Ronald R. Dodge, Jr.
Production Statistician
Master MOUS 2000

 

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

If each section is only a page long, you can use just s# (omitting the page
number).

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

 

[CyberTaz]

Quite true ‹ I should have clarified that... Or if you want to print the
entire section regardless of length. Thanks for pointing it out.

Regards |:>)
Bob Jones
[MVP] Office:Mac

 

[CyberTaz]

Understandable, but it becomes more "intuitive" once you wrap your head
around the fact that there is no such thing as a "page" in the structure of
a Word document It's a linear flow of content comprising one section
unless you choose to subdivide it into more.

Regards |:>)
Bob Jones
[MVP] Office:Mac

 

[Ronald R. Dodge, Jr.]

In older applications, there were such things as pages. By the 2 of you
saying word is just a stream of data makes me think of HTML documents as
HTML documents has no such thing as pages either. I guess another reason
why I wouldn't have thought of Word documents to be a stream of data,
whenever I have attempted to copy stuff from Word into another document
(about 14 years ago), the copied data would include every single line break
(rather if it was a hard one put in by the user or a soft one done by the
application for word wrap purposes) unlike when I used Note Pad, even if the
document did word wrap, it wouldn't carry over the soft line breaks. As a
result for what I was doing with online coding, I ended up using Note Pad
for that purpose instead of Word as I didn't want the soft line breaks to
carry over. When the soft line breaks was copied over, it would end up
splitting the code at points that would then not allow the code to work,
thus why I couldn't have the soft line breaks carry over in that case.

Anyhow, guess MS basically was taking Word from an isolated document to an
online document.

As for the 2007 version of MS Office, I don't really like it cause MS
majorly changed the interface, thus means a lot of the stuff I did by
keyboard no longer works and it requires significant relearning with regards
to the interface. Another thing, they didn't fix many of the technical
issues I have spotted and pointed out, so apparently, they were only after
the interface side with only increasing a minor few of the arbitrary
limitations on the technical side.

One such case, though I realize this is a Word newsgroup, not Excel,
according to Excel specifications, the number of defined names is limited to
memory. I proved a few years back, though learned the hard way as the file
that I had put in 6 digit figure of defined names into via VBA coding, I
lost everything in that file except for formulas and data values when I had
opened up that file again after having saved it and closed it out with such
huge number of defined names to address an issue that management had caused
me with regards to having to adjust so many formulas in so many different
places. Anyhow, learned an Excel working can only do up to at the most,
65536 defined names. After that situation took place, I basically decided
to convert a pretty good majority of my formulas to VBA code and not only
that, but to make the VBA code more dynamic, I could only think of using
range names to get away of absolute references within VBA. However, as a
result of the issue that took place, I ended up having to come up with a
compromise to address this defined names limitation within a single
workbook, which I did by using rows and columns for range names. Good thing
I had that particular document backed up so as I didn't have to redo
everything in it as it has in it not only data and formulas, but also
various formats, charts, and what not.

I suspect the reason for this limitation, the Index property appear to be
only a 2 byte property on the Names Collection object. Not only that, but
also according to documentation, the Index property is suppose to be a LONG
data type property (4 bytes), but it's acting more like an INTEGER data type
property (2 bytes).

--
Thanks,

Ronald R. Dodge, Jr.
Production Statistician
Master MOUS 2000

 

[grammatim]

As for the 2007 version of MS Office, I don't really like it cause MS
majorly changed the interface, thus means a lot of the stuff I did by
keyboard no longer works and it requires significant relearning with regards
to the interface.  

Which keyboard commands no longer work?