Nonprinting Characters are way too small, you might call them tiny or miniscule even.

A

ajc3

The subject pretty much says it all.

I am helping a user with Word 2004 for Macintosh, and she likes to use
the nonprinting characters function to see if there are double spaces
and whatnot.

It appears that since I've last tried this particular feature, the
little dots that represent spaces have shrunk by a few pixels. While
that may not seem like a lot, it's making a big difference for the
readability of these characters.

Anyone have any thoughts or tips on making those dots bigger and easier
to see?

I read a previous solution that was summed up as "use a mono-spaced
font", which I tried. But although I know that this makes the spaces
easier to see, it doesn't actually make the dot character any larger.
Besides, this is a fairly long manuscript, so we'd rather not mess
around with styles and fonts for the whole thing.

I also tried setting the font smoothing feature in the Appearance
System preference, but this did not make any difference either.

Thanks in advance,
A.J.
 
P

Paul Berkowitz

The subject pretty much says it all.

I am helping a user with Word 2004 for Macintosh, and she likes to use
the nonprinting characters function to see if there are double spaces
and whatnot.

It appears that since I've last tried this particular feature, the
little dots that represent spaces have shrunk by a few pixels. While
that may not seem like a lot, it's making a big difference for the
readability of these characters.

Anyone have any thoughts or tips on making those dots bigger and easier
to see?

I read a previous solution that was summed up as "use a mono-spaced
font", which I tried. But although I know that this makes the spaces
easier to see, it doesn't actually make the dot character any larger.
Besides, this is a fairly long manuscript, so we'd rather not mess
around with styles and fonts for the whole thing.

I also tried setting the font smoothing feature in the Appearance
System preference, but this did not make any difference either.

Thanks in advance,
A.J.

Faute de mieux, try setting the zoom higher, to 150% or so.


--
Paul Berkowitz
MVP MacOffice
Entourage FAQ Page: <http://www.entourage.mvps.org/faq/index.html>
AppleScripts for Entourage: <http://macscripter.net/scriptbuilders/>

Please "Reply To Newsgroup" to reply to this message. Emails will be
ignored.

PLEASE always state which version of Microsoft Office you are using -
**2004**, X or 2001. It's often impossible to answer your questions
otherwise.
 
A

ajc3

Thanks for the suggestion, I gave that a try, but the little dots don't
seem to change in size, they still appear to be a single pixel or so.

When I got to work today, I tried it out on Word 2000 for Windows, and
the dots are clearly much larger. I would say the size of an actual
period. And also, on Windows, your suggestion of increasing the zoom
affects the size of those dots, whereas on Macintosh it did not....

I don't know. Is there a direct channel for submitting a bug / "feature
request" for the Macintosh Office team?

Thanks again,
A.J.
 
P

Paul Berkowitz

Thanks for the suggestion, I gave that a try, but the little dots don't
seem to change in size, they still appear to be a single pixel or so.

When I got to work today, I tried it out on Word 2000 for Windows, and
the dots are clearly much larger. I would say the size of an actual
period. And also, on Windows, your suggestion of increasing the zoom
affects the size of those dots, whereas on Macintosh it did not....

I don't know. Is there a direct channel for submitting a bug / "feature
request" for the Macintosh Office team?

For the moment, no. You just did, actually - they're monitoring this
newsgroup (though not many others).

--
Paul Berkowitz
MVP MacOffice
Entourage FAQ Page: <http://www.entourage.mvps.org/faq/index.html>
AppleScripts for Entourage: <http://macscripter.net/scriptbuilders/>

Please "Reply To Newsgroup" to reply to this message. Emails will be
ignored.

PLEASE always state which version of Microsoft Office you are using -
**2004**, X or 2001. It's often impossible to answer your questions
otherwise.
 
Top