Please give us REVEAL CODES like WORD PERFECT not reveal codes in.

[ALeiS]

Thank you for the info-I will probably try this add-in.

I searched for "macro reader" in Word Help and all I got was the standard
stuff on how to record and play macros. (I do know about macros; I use them
in both Word and WP. I like keyboard shortcuts; it is a lot easier to record
a macro and assign a shortcut than use the mouse to hunt for commands in the
menus or on the toolbar icons. It's just not efficient to keep moving my
hands from the keyboard to the mouse. . . Sorry for the tangent.) Anyway, I
am not sure what you meant by the 'macro reader' comment.

I suspect, though, that if your suggestion has anything to do with Word
auto-finding or auto-replacing two spaces for every sentence, that it will
actually take more time. I haven't met a word processor yet that can
consistently tell the difference between an abbreviation and the end of a
sentence-too many false alarms. Typically, I check spaces at the same time I
do all my other editing (and I can do at least that now with the 'reveal
nonprinting...' feature. In fact, I prefer to do all my editing in the same
order the text goes, not a task or a "style" at a time, which is why I will
probably spring for the add-in program you suggested (once I have a few spare
minutes to check into it some more).

Perhaps you meant something else about the macro thing. If so, feel free to
clarify.

Thanks.

 

[Beth Melton]

I understand completely about using keyboard shortcuts. When I switched from
keyboard driven applications (DOS, such as WP 5 and Lotus) to a Macintosh
and a mouse I suspect it was years before I reached the same level of
efficiency, or at least felt like I did.

My other suggestions weren't necessarily auto-finding and replacing. While
you may have some need for this I was leaning more towards having Word
highlight (such as in yellow or green) those areas you need to take a closer
look at. For example highlight every occurrence of an italicized comma or
double spaces, which might make things faster regardless of the application
you are using since it would eliminate the need to scrutinize every comma.
I've used this method in the past for similar situations and bright yellow
is definitely easy to spot and I have found this method does catch things
better than I can - I invariably miss something on occasion. I did note that
you prefer to work through the text so this may not work for you. BUT, you
never know so here's a quick example if interested (or perhaps you could use
this type of method as a final check to make sure you did catch everything
since the type of work you do is crucial):

- On the Formatting toolbar click the arrow next to the Text Highlight
button and select a highlight color. Press Esc to turn the Highlighter off.
(The last color you select for the Highlight will be the color applied in
the following steps.)
- Press F5 to open Find
- Click the Replace tab
- Click the More button at the bottom
- In the Find What text box type a comma
- Click the Format button at the bottom, select Font, click Italic, and then
click OK
- Place the insertion point in the Replace text box, click the Special
button, and then click "Find What Text" (you should see ^& in the text box)
- With the insertion point still in the Replace text box, click the Format
button and then click Highlight
- Click Replace All

The result is only those commas that also have the Italic format applied are
highlighted. To remove the Highlight, if you have no other highlighted areas
in your document, select all (Ctrl+A), click the arrow next to the Text
Highlight button and then click None.

It's this type of task you could record using the Macro Recorder (I'm not
sure where "Macro reader" came from??) and assign a keyboard shortcut to in
order to automate the process.

Please post all follow-up questions to the newsgroup. Requests for
assistance by email cannot be acknowledged.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Beth Melton
Microsoft Office MVP

Coauthor of Word 2007 Inside Out:
http://www.microsoft.com/MSPress/books/9801.aspx#AboutTheBook

Word FAQ: http://mvps.org/word
TechTrax eZine: http://mousetrax.com/techtrax/
MVP FAQ site: http://mvps.org/

 

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

Regarding my "sarcastic tone," I was responding in kind to the tone of the

"Life after Reveal Codes" article. Have you read it? It isn't exactly
written in a diplomatic tone. In addition to its condescending tone, the
content of the article shows that the author has absolutely no understanding
of the concerns faced by people who are looking for the nonexisent Word
equivalent of 'reveal codes.'

I am the author of the article. I used WordPerfect for many years and there
are many WP features I still occasionally miss, but Reveal Codes is rarely
one of them; I found the inline codes usually more troublesome than helpful,
especially when they were reduplicated many times.

As a copy editor and typesetter, I do have to be anal about whether or not
commas are italicized, though in mainstream publishing the convention is to
italicize a comma following an italicized word rather than the reverse. Note
that if you double-click to select a word to italicize, Word will italicize
a space after it but *not* any punctuation; that makes my job harder but
yours easier.

FWIW, I have reread this article and fail to find any trace of
condescension, but I suppose that must be in the eyes of the beholder.

"Life after Reveal Codes" doesn't even

suggest the partial fix of clicking on the 'paragraph' symbol (shortcut Ctrl*
a/k/a Ctrl+Shift+8) to toggle "reveal non-printing characters," which
displays a little "dot" for every space so you can easily spot extra or
omitted spaces.

I guess you must not have given up on the article too soon because item #1
(yes, that's right, the very first point) says:

“The most important one is display of nonprinting characters. The Show/Hide
¶ button on the Standard toolbar toggles this display on and off.


“The meaning of each of the nonprinting characters (or 'formatting marks,'
as they are known in Word 2000 and 2002), is explained in ‘What do all those
funny marks, like the dots between the words in my document, and the square
bullets in the left margin, mean?’ With these symbols displayed, it is much
easier to find out that, for example, your document is printing an extra
blank page because you have half a dozen empty paragraphs at the end.â€

The referenced (linked) article is an exhaustive discussion of the meaning
of all the nonprinting characters.

 

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

Note also that a shortcut for applying formatting in the Find dialog is to
use the same keyboard shortcuts used in the text. For example, press Ctrl+I
once to get Format: Font: Italic. Press Ctrl+I again to get Format: Font:
Not Italic. A third time removes the formatting. The same can be done with
Ctrl+B, Ctrl+U, Ctrl+Shift+A, Ctrl+Shift+K, etc.

 

[Don Ellis]

Hi Beth,

Thanks for that link... I downloaded the Crosseyes program and when it
wouldn't install, I contacted the company. Here was their reply:

"The version of CE you have was not built for office 2007. We will have a
new version soon that will work for office 2007. Please check back with us in
late September, we should have it for release by then. Sorry for the
inconvenience."

But I like the idea and there is a trial version, so I will certainly try
again later.

Don

Best regards,
:

 

[Beth Melton]

Yeah, that makes sense, they would need a different add-in for Word 2007.
Thanks for the update.

Please post all follow-up questions to the newsgroup. Requests for
assistance by email cannot be acknowledged.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Beth Melton
Microsoft Office MVP

Coauthor of Word 2007 Inside Out:
http://www.microsoft.com/MSPress/books/9801.aspx#AboutTheBook

Word FAQ: http://mvps.org/word
TechTrax eZine: http://mousetrax.com/techtrax/
MVP FAQ site: http://mvps.org/

 

[Graham Mayor]

If you are feeling really adventurous, DOCX is an XML format document in a
compressed format. You could open that format with a decompression tool such
as WinRar and view the resulting codes directly from the document

--
<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>><<>
Graham Mayor - Word MVP


<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>><<>

 

[GMofUSA-PO]

Dear Dian D. Chapman, Technical Consultant - Microsoft MVP, MOS Certified,

I’ve read the articles; I’ve read all the comments for this subject matter.
I am very frustrated and agree in “most†with Mr. AleiS communications! This
is ridiculous & many of the communications he received in return was done so
with bad taste and irresponsive to his direct query.

I commonly receive word documents that are pre-formatted (Pre-designed style
templates from word) that often contain cell errors! Example: The format in
one cell is varied from the balance. I now understand the reason reveal
formatting in Word 07 is worthless in correcting what seemed to be simple
flaws. I made the mistake of attempting to correct an error in a time
sensitive document this AM and here I am posting this comment because of such.

Thank goodness I have a secretary that can take the “TIME†to correct the
changes, by redoing the documents from scratch!

I have ordered to my IT department to pilot your add on suggestion in hopes
this feature will work. For this I/we thank you in advance for this
suggestion.

Regards,
General Manager of US Corporate Services

 

[Bonnie]

CyberTaz:

Not sure if I'm directing this correcting, but these people who can't live
without their "WordPerfect," c'mon, give me a break. I, too, work in the
legal profession as actually a legal secretary for now 24 years and until
2002, we used WordPerfect religiously. I was one of those who did not under
any circumstance want to start using Word and fought it intensely, but now, I
would fight it intensely to go back to the inferior product of WordPerfect.
People just need to chill out and give Word a chance. I really like it, even
though I have not mastered the styles/headings yet, I'm still plugging along
and my bosses (the attorneys I work for) seem quite happy with my work, as
I'm a perfectionist and it's quite easy to get a comma italicized. Keep up
the good work in helping people on this site.
--
Bonnie Lynn Green

I don't expect to change your mind about Word & won't even endeavor to do
so, other than to point out that there are myriad features within the
program of which you seem to be unaware and unwilling to learn. It's your
prerogative to do so, just remember that the first word in your original
post was "Help." That's what the people here are trying to do.

With reference to that there are a few comments in-line below:


On 8/18/07 7:42 PM, in article
(e-mail address removed), "ALeiS"

Responding to another comment: YES, there are a lot of people who CAN tell
whether a comma is italicized just by looking at it. It is these people who
decide or at least influence whether an article gets published or whether a
court accepts an appeal-something that can affect a client's money, custody
of their children, whether or for how long they go to prison, and, in rare
cases, whether they live or die. I don't expect you to understand, but trust
me, the citations have to be perfect because even a few mistakes damage the
writer's credibility--and damaged credibility means diminished persuasive
effect. The way the Word program is written makes checking these things a
lot more difficult than it needs to be.

It is a sad and frightening indictment of the legal system & the people
within it if italicized commas are pivotal in determining the outcome in any
of these issues, let alone the life or death of a human being. I was always
under the impression that the time crunch in the legal arena was due to case
load rather than time being spent examining commas through a magnifying
glass. Perhaps the system & its cadre should be under even more intense
scrutiny than the paperwork they shuffle.

Regarding my "sarcastic tone," I was responding in kind to the tone of the
"Life after Reveal Codes" article. Have you read it? It isn't exactly
written in a diplomatic tone. In addition to its condescending tone, the
content of the article shows that the author has absolutely no understanding
of the concerns faced by people who are looking for the nonexisent Word
equivalent of 'reveal codes.'

Yes, I've read it several times. Further, as a 12-year user & trainer of
WordPerfect (including the Legal Office version) I drew none of the same
conclusions about the article or its author. All that notwithstanding, the
individual who referred you to the article *isn't* the one who wrote it -
your sarcasm was directed toward Dian.

Thanks to all for confirming my suspicions that it just can't be done in
Word. And I do appreciate everyone trying to help. Unfortunately, no one
seems to fully appreciate the real issue; as a result these postings are all
just regurgitations of what others have already posted.

The only suspicions which have been confirmed are that some people refuse to
learn how to get it done and choose to snipe at and dismiss those who offer
assistance. Before slinging more accusations alleging "condescending tone"
you might re-read the last sentence in the above quote - as well as a number
of others throughout your posts. Your insinuation & innuendo that the
contributors to this forum are any less demanding or conscientious about
their work than those in "your profession" are overly abundant, and to
further suggest that they are unable to "appreciate the real issue" is at
once offensive and insulting.

Thanks anyway.

<snip>

You're most certainly welcome [he replied with an equal flavoring of
dismissive, off-handed insincerity].

--
Bob Jones
[MVP] Office:Mac

 

[Peter T. Daniels]

Styles are really basic and really easy -- they're just pre-made
collections of all the different formatting decisions that can apply
to a paragraph. You can tell Word to show you only the few styles that
are actually being used in your document.

Headings are simple if you just use the styles "Heading 1" through
"Heading 9" that come with (modifying their formats as desired).

If you need your headings and/or paragraphs numbered, it's a little
bit more complicated, and it works somewhat differently in Word2003
and Word2007.

 

[Greg Maxey]

Peter,

Since you are seeding more opinions. Here one of mine:

Like Styles, customizing the Ribbon is really basic and really easy when you
know how.

Bonnie,

If you haven't already seen them, these links might be helpful:

http://word.mvps.org/FAQs/Customization/CreateATemplatePart1.htm

http://word.mvps.org/FAQs/Customization/CreateATemplatePart2.htm

http://www.shaunakelly.com/word/numbering/OutlineNumbering.html

--
Greg Maxey - Word MVP

My web site http://gregmaxey.mvps.org



Styles are really basic and really easy -- they're just pre-made
collections of all the different formatting decisions that can apply
to a paragraph. You can tell Word to show you only the few styles that
are actually being used in your document.

Headings are simple if you just use the styles "Heading 1" through
"Heading 9" that come with (modifying their formats as desired).

If you need your headings and/or paragraphs numbered, it's a little
bit more complicated, and it works somewhat differently in Word2003
and Word2007.

 

[Peter T. Daniels]

Bonnie,

Greg Maxey is an experienced, albeit self-taught, programmer, and a
liar who has suddenly made it his business to stalk me and post inane
replies to everything I post.

"Really easy when you know how" is a tautology, and a pretty idiotic
one.

If it were "really basic," Microsoft would include instructions for
doing it with every copy of Word, as it does for customizing the Quick
Access Toolbar.

 

[Greg Maxey]

.... and a liar! My, my now that's really strong. Next thing you'll be
shouting again.

Where's MyHandsy? You due for another spanking.

--
Greg Maxey - Word MVP

My web site http://gregmaxey.mvps.org



Bonnie,

Greg Maxey is an experienced, albeit self-taught, programmer, and a
liar who has suddenly made it his business to stalk me and post inane
replies to everything I post.

"Really easy when you know how" is a tautology, and a pretty idiotic
one.

If it were "really basic," Microsoft would include instructions for
doing it with every copy of Word, as it does for customizing the Quick
Access Toolbar.

 

[Greg Maxey]

Peter,

Less some lurker assume that you have the corner on truth ...

I really have no interest in stalking you and if anyone had the slightest
interest in checking your facts they would quickly realize that I have
completely ignored nearly all of the 18+ thousand post and counting that
your have made in support forums within the last few years and most of the
ones that you have made recently. My intentions are to post replies only to
your posts in which you display your unbridled arrogance, offer your
opinions stated as facts, disparage the skills and contributions of others,
attempt to close doors or discourage users from experiencing the full range
of Word's capabilities by advising them that something is not possible or
not worth the effort or too hard; when and as it pleases me. Considering
your past and your nature it may please me to stay very busy.

Take Bonnie's comment for example:

"I have not mastered the styles/headings yet ..."

For all we know, for all you know, while perhaps she hasn't mastered them
she may already know far more about them than you or I. Even considering
that you are a man with a Ph.D., a former college professor and author,
editor, translator of numerous articles and books, with perhaps even an
elevated status in academic and linguistic circles, it "is" possible that
she is already more knowledgeable about headings/styles than you are!! Your
post implies that you have mastered them and that she is completely ignorant
of styles/headings and their employment/function. That is unbridled
arrogance. Even if I am wrong concerning your implications I fail to see
how your opinions about their simplicity and ease of use or your profound
statement that numbered headings are a bit more complicated offered any
substantive support or assistance. Perhaps you were just being inane.

Cheers

 

[Peter T. Daniels]

Peter,

Less some lurker assume that you have the corner on truth ...

I really have no interest in stalking you and if anyone had the slightest
interest in checking your facts they would quickly realize that I have
completely ignored nearly all of the 18+ thousand post and counting that
your have made in support forums within the last few years and most of the
ones that you have made recently.  

That is, in fact, a lie. As of just now, according to the google
groups statistics, I have made 3257 postings to this newsgroup (over
the not quite two years that I have had Word2007) and 31 postings to
the word.printingfonts newsgroup. I have posted to no other "support
forums" (unless someone had crossposted a message I replied to).

 

[Greg Maxey]

We can take your word for it or take the word of Google that tracks and
maintains your profile. Your profile shows 18350 posts and counting in 7
groups starting in July 2006.

--
Greg Maxey - Word MVP

My web site http://gregmaxey.mvps.org

Peter,

Less some lurker assume that you have the corner on truth ...

I really have no interest in stalking you and if anyone had the slightest
interest in checking your facts they would quickly realize that I have
completely ignored nearly all of the 18+ thousand post and counting that
your have made in support forums within the last few years and most of the
ones that you have made recently.

That is, in fact, a lie. As of just now, according to the google
groups statistics, I have made 3257 postings to this newsgroup (over
the not quite two years that I have had Word2007) and 31 postings to
the word.printingfonts newsgroup. I have posted to no other "support
forums" (unless someone had crossposted a message I replied to).

 

[Tom Willett]

You guys need to get a room.

: We can take your word for it or take the word of Google that tracks and
: maintains your profile. Your profile shows 18350 posts and counting in 7
: groups starting in July 2006.
:
: --
: Greg Maxey - Word MVP
:
: My web site http://gregmaxey.mvps.org
:
:
:
: : On Aug 20, 9:07 am, "Greg Maxey"
: > Peter,
: >
: > Less some lurker assume that you have the corner on truth ...
: >
: > I really have no interest in stalking you and if anyone had the
slightest
: > interest in checking your facts they would quickly realize that I have
: > completely ignored nearly all of the 18+ thousand post and counting that
: > your have made in support forums within the last few years and most of
the
: > ones that you have made recently.
:
: That is, in fact, a lie. As of just now, according to the google
: groups statistics, I have made 3257 postings to this newsgroup (over
: the not quite two years that I have had Word2007) and 31 postings to
: the word.printingfonts newsgroup. I have posted to no other "support
: forums" (unless someone had crossposted a message I replied to).
:
:

 

[Peter T. Daniels]

Two of those seven groups are "support forums."

We can take your word for it or take the word of Google that tracks and
maintains your profile.  Your profile shows 18350 posts and counting in7
groups starting in July 2006.

--
Greg Maxey -  Word MVP

My web sitehttp://gregmaxey.mvps.org
Word MVP web sitehttp://word.mvps.org





That is, in fact, a lie. As of just now, according to the google
groups statistics, I have made 3257 postings to this newsgroup (over
the not quite two years that I have had Word2007) and 31 postings to
the word.printingfonts newsgroup. I have posted to no other "support
forums" (unless someone had crossposted a message I replied to).

 

[Greg Maxey]

Tom,

Something similar has already been suggested. I'm game provided it comes
with a brace of pistols

 

[Greg Maxey]

Two of those seven groups are "support forums."





- Show quoted text -

Ah, so it it only 3257 and counting. 18350 and counting was an
error. I have posted about 500 times in the same period. So does
this mean:

"Greg Maxey is an experienced, albeit self-taught, programmer, and a
liar who has suddenly made it his business to stalk me and post inane
replies to everything I post."

.... was a lie? Or just nane?