Odd Field Behavior

[Greg Maxey]

This could be a printer issue or a Word2003 issue.

I have an nested IF and formula field to evaluate the
input of two table cells. If the forumla returns !Zero
Divide or a value less < 2, the field result is displayed
with the font formatted as red. Results 2 or greater are
displayed with black font. The code is provided below.
Note that the [ ] are added to signify the start and stop
of the part of the code formatted with a red font.

{ IF { = (a3/c3/) } < “2.00”[{ IF { =(a3/c3) } = “!Zero
Divide””No GPA or Invalid” { =(a3/c3) \# 0.000}}]{ =
(a3/c3) \# 0.000 }}

The field performs and displays on the screen both at work
(Word 2000) and at home (Word 2003). Here is the odd
part, if I print at home or toggle to print preview, the
results to the field simply disappears!! When I close
print preview the display is still gone. If I look at the
UnDo icon there are three instances of Update Fields
displayed. If I CTRL+Z three times the display returns.
It is weird. At work with Word 2000 everything displays,
and prints normally. The only difference I see is
toggleing print preview in Word 2000 results in only 2
Update Fields intances.

I used the macro utility at home and ran the Word Update
Fields command three times. There was no effect on the
display.

I am thinking this might have something to do with the
Word 2003 Print command. Was wondering if anybody out
there has experienced this issue and has found a solution.

 

[macropod]

Hi Greg,

I don't see any particular reason for your field's misbehaviour, unless
it's something to do with the superfluous '/' following the first 'a3/c3'
expression.

Also, wouldn't it be easier to code your field thus:
{IF{=c3}= 0 "No GPA or Invalid" {IF{=a3/c3}< 2 {=a3/c3 \# 0.000} {=a3/c3 \#
0.000}}}
where the string "No GPA or Invalid" and the first ' {=a3/c3 \# 0.000}' are
both formatted in red? Testing for the divisor=0 is simpler than testing
for the division's result = "!Zero Divide", and you don't need to put the
'a3/c3' expressions in brackets.

Cheers
PS: It took longer to figure out what all the '“' strings in your
post were about than to recode the formula!!


This could be a printer issue or a Word2003 issue.

I have an nested IF and formula field to evaluate the
input of two table cells. If the forumla returns !Zero
Divide or a value less < 2, the field result is displayed
with the font formatted as red. Results 2 or greater are
displayed with black font. The code is provided below.
Note that the [ ] are added to signify the start and stop
of the part of the code formatted with a red font.

{ IF { = (a3/c3/) } < “2.00”[{ IF { =(a3/c3) } = “!Zero
Divide””No GPA or Invalid” { =(a3/c3) \# 0.000}}]{ =
(a3/c3) \# 0.000 }}

The field performs and displays on the screen both at work
(Word 2000) and at home (Word 2003). Here is the odd
part, if I print at home or toggle to print preview, the
results to the field simply disappears!! When I close
print preview the display is still gone. If I look at the
UnDo icon there are three instances of Update Fields
displayed. If I CTRL+Z three times the display returns.
It is weird. At work with Word 2000 everything displays,
and prints normally. The only difference I see is
toggleing print preview in Word 2000 results in only 2
Update Fields intances.

I used the macro utility at home and ran the Word Update
Fields command three times. There was no effect on the
display.

I am thinking this might have something to do with the
Word 2003 Print command. Was wondering if anybody out
there has experienced this issue and has found a solution.

 

[Peter Jamieson]

I'm not sure what the problem is but experiments here (also Word 2000/Word
2003, but just doing the Print Previews) suggest that if your formula is
within a table (where the a3 and c3 refer to table cells) but you also have,
e.g.

{ set a3 100 }{ set c3 0 }{ =({ a3 }/{ c3 }) }

outside the table, then in Word 2003 the formula previews as blank wherever
you put it. Without the { =({ a3 }/{ c3 }) } the formula previews OK,
although you need to refresh the field results first. In Word 2000 it always
works.

Now that experiment obviously does not pin down precisely what causes the
problem but it suggests to me that Word 2003 might be getting more confused
between table cell references and bookmark names than Word 2000 does.

I suppose the colour issue could be related to

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=835714

- I think there is also a recent hotfix related to this issue. Since
hotfixing seems to be more frequent it has become a bit harder to keep track
of this stuff!

--
Peter Jamieson - Word MVP
Word MVP web site http://word.mvps.org/

This could be a printer issue or a Word2003 issue.

I have an nested IF and formula field to evaluate the
input of two table cells. If the forumla returns !Zero
Divide or a value less < 2, the field result is displayed
with the font formatted as red. Results 2 or greater are
displayed with black font. The code is provided below.
Note that the [ ] are added to signify the start and stop
of the part of the code formatted with a red font.

{ IF { = (a3/c3/) } < “2.00”[{ IF { =(a3/c3) } = “!Zero
Divide””No GPA or Invalid” { =(a3/c3) \# 0.000}}]{ =
(a3/c3) \# 0.000 }}

The field performs and displays on the screen both at work
(Word 2000) and at home (Word 2003). Here is the odd
part, if I print at home or toggle to print preview, the
results to the field simply disappears!! When I close
print preview the display is still gone. If I look at the
UnDo icon there are three instances of Update Fields
displayed. If I CTRL+Z three times the display returns.
It is weird. At work with Word 2000 everything displays,
and prints normally. The only difference I see is
toggleing print preview in Word 2000 results in only 2
Update Fields intances.

I used the macro utility at home and ran the Word Update
Fields command three times. There was no effect on the
display.

I am thinking this might have something to do with the
Word 2003 Print command. Was wondering if anybody out
there has experienced this issue and has found a solution.

 

[Greg Maxey]

Macropod,

The superfluous "/" was a typo in converting from code to text. Yes your
method would be easier. The beast grew from a simple a3/c3 . Thanks for
the reminder on the brackets. The newsgroup posting replaced the speach
marks with the smattering of symbols :-(.

Either way it doesn't seem to make a difference. Peter Jamieson might be on
to it.

Thanks

--
Greg Maxey
A peer in "peer to peer" support
Rockledge, FL
To e-mail, edit out the "w...spam" in (e-mail address removed)

Hi Greg,

I don't see any particular reason for your field's misbehaviour,
unless it's something to do with the superfluous '/' following the
first 'a3/c3' expression.

Also, wouldn't it be easier to code your field thus:
{IF{=c3}= 0 "No GPA or Invalid" {IF{=a3/c3}< 2 {=a3/c3 \# 0.000}
{=a3/c3 \#
0.000}}}
where the string "No GPA or Invalid" and the first ' {=a3/c3 \#
0.000}' are both formatted in red? Testing for the divisor=0 is
simpler than testing for the division's result = "!Zero Divide", and
you don't need to put the 'a3/c3' expressions in brackets.

Cheers
PS: It took longer to figure out what all the '“' strings in
your post were about than to recode the formula!!


This could be a printer issue or a Word2003 issue.

I have an nested IF and formula field to evaluate the
input of two table cells. If the forumla returns !Zero
Divide or a value less < 2, the field result is displayed
with the font formatted as red. Results 2 or greater are
displayed with black font. The code is provided below.
Note that the [ ] are added to signify the start and stop
of the part of the code formatted with a red font.

{ IF { = (a3/c3/) } < “2.00”[{ IF { =(a3/c3) } =
“!Zero Divide””No GPA or Invalid” { =(a3/c3)
\# 0.000}}]{ = (a3/c3) \# 0.000 }}

The field performs and displays on the screen both at work
(Word 2000) and at home (Word 2003). Here is the odd
part, if I print at home or toggle to print preview, the
results to the field simply disappears!! When I close
print preview the display is still gone. If I look at the
UnDo icon there are three instances of Update Fields
displayed. If I CTRL+Z three times the display returns.
It is weird. At work with Word 2000 everything displays,
and prints normally. The only difference I see is
toggleing print preview in Word 2000 results in only 2
Update Fields intances.

I used the macro utility at home and ran the Word Update
Fields command three times. There was no effect on the
display.

I am thinking this might have something to do with the
Word 2003 Print command. Was wondering if anybody out
there has experienced this issue and has found a solution.

 

[Greg Maxey]

Peter,

Sounds like you are on to something, but color doesn't
seem to make any difference. I modified the forumla as
suggested by macropod. It is four dot on in Word2000 but
in Word2003 the field results go blank on print or print
preview with or with color applied to parts of the field
code. The only obvious differenc I can find between
Word2000 and Word2003 is Word2000 executes Fields Update
twice when I toggle to print preview and Word2003 executes
this command three times. The fields are not redisplayed
in the document until after the third CTRL+Z.

This is not good. How do you suppose would be best to
relay this to the MS folks?

-----Original Message-----
I'm not sure what the problem is but experiments here (also Word 2000/Word
2003, but just doing the Print Previews) suggest that if your formula is
within a table (where the a3 and c3 refer to table cells) but you also have,
e.g.

{ set a3 100 }{ set c3 0 }{ =({ a3 }/{ c3 }) }

outside the table, then in Word 2003 the formula previews as blank wherever
you put it. Without the { =({ a3 }/{ c3 }) } the formula previews OK,
although you need to refresh the field results first. In Word 2000 it always
works.

Now that experiment obviously does not pin down precisely what causes the
problem but it suggests to me that Word 2003 might be getting more confused
between table cell references and bookmark names than Word 2000 does.

I suppose the colour issue could be related to

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=835714

- I think there is also a recent hotfix related to this issue. Since
hotfixing seems to be more frequent it has become a bit harder to keep track
of this stuff!

--
Peter Jamieson - Word MVP
Word MVP web site http://word.mvps.org/

This could be a printer issue or a Word2003 issue.

I have an nested IF and formula field to evaluate the
input of two table cells. If the forumla returns !Zero
Divide or a value less < 2, the field result is displayed
with the font formatted as red. Results 2 or greater are
displayed with black font. The code is provided below.
Note that the [ ] are added to signify the start and stop
of the part of the code formatted with a red font.

{ IF { = (a3/c3/) } < “2.00”[{ IF { =(a3/c3) } = “!Zero
Divide””No GPA or Invalid” { =(a3/c3) \# 0.000}}]{ =
(a3/c3) \# 0.000 }}

The field performs and displays on the screen both at work
(Word 2000) and at home (Word 2003). Here is the odd
part, if I print at home or toggle to print preview, the
results to the field simply disappears!! When I close
print preview the display is still gone. If I look at the
UnDo icon there are three instances of Update Fields
displayed. If I CTRL+Z three times the display returns.
It is weird. At work with Word 2000 everything displays,
and prints normally. The only difference I see is
toggleing print preview in Word 2000 results in only 2
Update Fields intances.

I used the macro utility at home and ran the Word Update
Fields command three times. There was no effect on the
display.

I am thinking this might have something to do with the
Word 2003 Print command. Was wondering if anybody out
there has experienced this issue and has found a solution.



.

 

[Cindy M -WordMVP-]

Hi Peter/Greg,

I vaguely recall seeing a problem similar to this one posted in the German
groups... a LONG time back (maybe a year or more). Can't recall any details
or the resolution BUT

1. There is definitely a potential conflict within a table if one uses a
bookmark name that could also be interpreted as a cell reference. Doug Robbins
hit on this one *years* ago.

2. This will be exacerbated by the fact that REF is being omitted from the Ref
fields. Implicit REF fields are *DANGEROUS*!! (Did I emphasize that enough?)
They can cause all kinds of unexpected results; they should only be used when
you know you want to use them for a particular reason (like in mail merge with
a table data source, in order to bring across font formatting).

So, Greg: 1. Change the bookmark names, and 2. put REF in the field codes and
see if that changes something.

I'm not sure what the problem is but experiments here (also Word 2000/Word
2003, but just doing the Print Previews) suggest that if your formula is
within a table (where the a3 and c3 refer to table cells) but you also have,
e.g.

{ set a3 100 }{ set c3 0 }{ =({ a3 }/{ c3 }) }

outside the table, then in Word 2003 the formula previews as blank wherever
you put it. Without the { =({ a3 }/{ c3 }) } the formula previews OK,
although you need to refresh the field results first. In Word 2000 it always
works.

Cindy Meister
INTER-Solutions, Switzerland
http://homepage.swissonline.ch/cindymeister (last update Sep 30 2003)
http://www.word.mvps.org

This reply is posted in the Newsgroup; please post any follow question or
reply in the newsgroup and not by e-mail

 

[Greg Maxey]

Cindy,

I am not using any bookmarks in my formula. I am using
only table cell references. Still I will check to see if
changing (e.g., {= a3/c3}) as table cell references to {=
({REF a3bm}/{REF c3bm})} where a3bm and c3bm are bookmark
names for the data bookmarked in cells a3 and c3.

It works either way here on a Word2000 machine and I will
try it at home later with Word2003.

Thanks for the suggestions.

 

[Cindy M -WordMVP-]

Hi Greg,

I am not using any bookmarks in my formula.

Ah, sorry! I was looking at Peter's posting and thinking
he'd picked up the SET fields from your original...

Cindy

 

[Greg Maxey]

Cindy,

Looks like your memory nailed it. I went through and bookmarked cells a3,
b3, c3, d3, a20, b20, c20, and d20 as a2bm, b3bm etc, etc.

I then went in my eight formula fields and replaced every table reference
e.g., { =c3}, {=a3/c3} with and equivalent REF field i.e., { REF c3bm }, {
=({ REF a3bm}/{ REF c3bm})} and viola it is now working as expected.

This is a real hair ball however and certainly doesn't qualify as an
improvement.

Thanks for offer your suggestions.

 

[Cindy M -WordMVP-]

Hi Greg,

Looks like your memory nailed it. I went through and bookmarked cells a3,
b3, c3, d3, a20, b20, c20, and d20 as a2bm, b3bm etc, etc.

I then went in my eight formula fields and replaced every table reference
e.g., { =c3}, {=a3/c3} with and equivalent REF field i.e., { REF c3bm }, {
=({ REF a3bm}/{ REF c3bm})} and viola it is now working as expected.

This is a real hair ball however and certainly doesn't qualify as an
improvement.

Interesting, and I agree it's certainly not an improvement. Would you still
have a copy of the original document, with the problem? I'd like to take a
look at it, and if it misbehaves on my installation, as well, forward it to
the Word team...

Cindy Meister
INTER-Solutions, Switzerland
http://homepage.swissonline.ch/cindymeister (last update Sep 30 2003)
http://www.word.mvps.org

This reply is posted in the Newsgroup; please post any follow question or
reply in the newsgroup and not by e-mail