Shading vs. Hilighting

[mdh]

What are the functional differences between shading and hilighting,
and when should each be used for hilighting a range of text in a
document?

Some differences that I've noticed:
- the hilighting tool does not have a "repeat last command" option
(ie, can not select another range of text and press CMD-Y); shading
does
- hilighting tool has a very limited palette (very difficult to
read text underneath this hilighting); shading has a wide range of
colors to use (some are nicely desaturated)
- can search for text that is hilighted; can not search for text
that is shaded
- can select many paragraphs of text and clear hilighting at once;
can not do this with shading
- shading fills the background of a table cell; hilighting only
affects the text


How are these intended to be used? The features seem to be very
awkward.

I'd like to have some coloring options to help mark regions of text
for later review, etc.
I much prefer the appearance of the shading tools for use when
writing, but very difficult to clean up at the end.

Thanks,
Matt

 

[mdh]

I should add that I'm using Word 2004 11.2.3, although I have office
2008 as well.

Have you MVP folks made the jump to 2008 yet?
(some things appeared to be a bit better; others seemed to go
backwards, and over the summer I had the impression that most serious
users were sticking with 2004 for the time-being)

thanks,
Matt

 

[John McGhie]

Hi Matt:

"Highlighting" is designed to fill the same function as a felt-tipped
highlighter pen would on paper. The highlight applied is not "part of the
text" and you can choose to print the document without it.

Highlighting was added as a feature back in the days when Word used an
eight-bit format that only supported 16 colours. Since it's designed only
to be used like a highlighter pen, nobody seems to have missed more colours.
I can't imagine trying to decode the reviewer's intentions in a document
that had comments highlighted in 16 different colours

Shading, on the other hand, is a "Property" of the text. It is what most
users would think of as "coloured text" or "coloured background". It IS
part of the text, and it will print.

When Word upgraded to a 16-bit format, we got 256 colours. When we went to
a 32-bit "engine" we got 16,000 colours and when the graphics engine was
upgraded we got millions.

So: If you are highlighting comments, use the highlighter, it's quick to
apply, and quick to remove, and you can suppress printing.

If you are formatting the document, use font colours and shading (preferably
in your styles...) and your colours will be treated as part of the text.

Nearly all the MVPs have Word 2008 loaded for answering questions. However,
most of us are engaged in professional documentation that normally requires
macros and customisations that are not available in Word 2008.

So I guess most of us "use" Word 2004 (or PC Word 2003, or 2007, or in my
case all three) for "work" and 2008 for "play". Parallels is your friend --
and the Coherence View in the latest version is just great!

Cheers

I should add that I'm using Word 2004 11.2.3, although I have office
2008 as well.

Have you MVP folks made the jump to 2008 yet?
(some things appeared to be a bit better; others seemed to go
backwards, and over the summer I had the impression that most serious
users were sticking with 2004 for the time-being)

thanks,
Matt

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Microsoft MVP, Word and Word:Mac
Sydney, Australia. mailto:[email protected]

 

[JE McGimpsey]

Nearly all the MVPs have Word 2008 loaded for answering questions. However,
most of us are engaged in professional documentation that normally requires
macros and customisations that are not available in Word 2008.

Yeah. FWIW, none of my clients have switched to 2008, though several
have it installed, and use it for conversion of their work product to
OOXML (Office 2007/8) file formats.

While some of them could use Word without macros, none of them can use
Excel without them (in addition to a nasty SUMPRODUCT() bug...)

So I guess most of us "use" Word 2004 (or PC Word 2003, or 2007, or in my
case all three) for "work" and 2008 for "play". Parallels is your friend --
and the Coherence View in the latest version is just great!

I still prefer to develop in Office 2004 (lowest common denominator),
but I have hot keys set for Word & XL 2003, 2004, 2007 and 2008, and
it's a rare day when three of the four aren't fired up.

 

[CyberTaz]

John has already answered your post but I'm bored so I thought I'd throw in
some thoughts from another perspective See the in line comments below;

What are the functional differences between shading and hilighting,
and when should each be used for hilighting a range of text in a
document?

The keyword being "functional" I tend to think of the Highlighter tool in
the same way as a highlighting marker when reading printed material. I use
if for marking content to call attention to certain passages for review,
further editing, key points, etc. - but for my own or internal workgroup
reference purposes - exclusively in document preparation or docs I receive
from others. I would never forward a final version that contained
Highlighting. [Additional points are included in the responses below.]

Shading OTOH is a formatting attribute which I use [sparingly] along with
Borders to set off specific portions of a document such as disclaimers,
boilerplate, inset quotes & so forth as an integral part of the document
design. As formatting it can be readily built into a style.

Some differences that I've noticed:
- the hilighting tool does not have a "repeat last command" option
(ie, can not select another range of text and press CMD-Y); shading
does

My interpretation of this is that - although categorically grouped with
formatting features - the Highlighter is a *tool*, not a formatting feature.
It's more of an "accessory" tool as described above. I guess the designers
just didn't know where else to put it

As for continuous use, once you select the tool by clicking directly on the
button you can highlight passage after passage by selecting text using
exactly the same methods as you normally would use: dbl-click a word,
triple-click a paragraph, shift-click a passage, Cmd-Click a sentence, drag
or whatever. Use the triangle on the right edge of the button to select a
different color whenever you wish.

- hilighting tool has a very limited palette (very difficult to
read text underneath this hilighting); shading has a wide range of
colors to use (some are nicely desaturated)

John explained this one in detail but I couldn't agree more - some of the
highlight colors chosen seem to be far too dark *unless* you (or the
originator) happen to use some lighter font colors for text. In those cases
the darker highlight colors come in particularly handy.

- can search for text that is hilighted; can not search for text
that is shaded

Not exactly true... If Shading is applied as part of a Style you can Find
based on that style. Even if a custom style isn't used you can click in a
Shaded are & use the Styles group of the Formatting Palette to Select All.

- can select many paragraphs of text and clear hilighting at once;
can not do this with shading

Sure you can: Select the same way then go to Format> Borders & Shading -
None (to remove Borders) and/or No Fill (to remove Shading).

- shading fills the background of a table cell; hilighting only
affects the text

Correct - that's one of the distinctions between the features. Highlighting
is applied line-by-line whereas Shading is more of a "fill". Further, if you
use other than Single Spaced Highlighting doesn't fill the additional space
between lines. Shading expands or contracts as appropriate regardless of the
line spacing used in the paragraphs to which it's applied.

How are these intended to be used? The features seem to be very
awkward.

I'd have to be a mind reader to answer that - the best I can offer is that
they're each "intended" to be used as the user sees fit

I'd like to have some coloring options to help mark regions of text
for later review, etc.
I much prefer the appearance of the shading tools for use when
writing, but very difficult to clean up at the end.

Maybe these ideas will be useful.

Thanks,
Matt

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

 

[John McGhie]

If you are running three of the four concurrently, you have entirely too
much memory in that box and you should give some to me!!

Yeah. FWIW, none of my clients have switched to 2008, though several
have it installed, and use it for conversion of their work product to
OOXML (Office 2007/8) file formats.

While some of them could use Word without macros, none of them can use
Excel without them (in addition to a nasty SUMPRODUCT() bug...)


I still prefer to develop in Office 2004 (lowest common denominator),
but I have hot keys set for Word & XL 2003, 2004, 2007 and 2008, and
it's a rare day when three of the four aren't fired up.

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Microsoft MVP, Word and Word:Mac
Sydney, Australia. mailto:[email protected]

 

[JE McGimpsey]

If you are running three of the four concurrently, you have entirely too
much memory in that box and you should give some to me!!

Some imprecision in my wording, obviously. I generally don't have more
than two fired up at any one time... but the combinations vary
throughout the day.

However, I have found that it's *possible* to run all 4 at once. Just be
prepared for a wait when switching to or from Parallels.

I only have 4 gigs - 2 assigned to Parallels.