Size matters

[GTS]

Many merge documents created at work without any user input- and every one
of them is saved so you can look at them latter. Thousands a week - so
storage is an issue.
I am looking to keep the files as small as possible - so pictures
(signatures, logos etc) are added using includepicture with the \d switch so
they're not saved. I try to keep the header information as small as possible
so only usefull data comes accross to Word.
Some documents contain pages that have no merge data in them - always the
same. If I recreate these pages as stand-alone pages can I save space by
inserting them using INCLUDETEXT, or a hyperlink, or embeded objects, or a
master doc with sub-documents? Seems to be so many ways to do it, but I
cannot find out if there is a way to get them to print without them saving
in the resulting merge docs? I did try embedding before, but for some reason
it made the file size of the saved docs increase dramatically!
TIA
Graham

 

[Cindy M -WordMVP-]

Hi Gts,

Some documents contain pages that have no merge data in them - always the
same. If I recreate these pages as stand-alone pages can I save space by
inserting them using INCLUDETEXT, or a hyperlink, or embeded objects, or a
master doc with sub-documents? Seems to be so many ways to do it, but I
cannot find out if there is a way to get them to print without them saving
in the resulting merge docs? I did try embedding before, but for some reason
it made the file size of the saved docs increase dramatically!
TIA

Embedding is definitely NOT the way to go. When you embed an object, you're
actually including parts of the application - definitely file bloat!

IncludeText doesn't have an equivalent of the \d switch. If you IncludeText,
the file will pretty much be the same size as when the text is simply in the
document.

About the only thing that would help would be to consciensciously use Styles
instead of direct formatting. If this is done correctly, a lot of invisible
formatting commands will be stripped out of the binary document.

Recreating the documents from a "clean" Normal.dot could also make a
difference. Especially if the Normal.dot from which they were originally
created contained any kind of Bullets-and-Numbering stuff, or was updated
through numerous versions of Word. Any "detritous" in it would also be present
in documents generated from it.

You might also want to look at using a ZIP tool to compress the files. ZIPPING
Word files can reduce file size appreciably.

Cindy Meister
INTER-Solutions, Switzerland
http://homepage.swissonline.ch/cindymeister (last update Jun 8 2004)
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

 

[GTS]

Hi Gts,

Embedding is definitely NOT the way to go. When you embed an object, you're
actually including parts of the application - definitely file bloat!

IncludeText doesn't have an equivalent of the \d switch. If you IncludeText,
the file will pretty much be the same size as when the text is simply in the
document.

About the only thing that would help would be to consciensciously use Styles
instead of direct formatting. If this is done correctly, a lot of invisible
formatting commands will be stripped out of the binary document.

Recreating the documents from a "clean" Normal.dot could also make a
difference. Especially if the Normal.dot from which they were originally
created contained any kind of Bullets-and-Numbering stuff, or was updated
through numerous versions of Word. Any "detritous" in it would also be present
in documents generated from it.

You might also want to look at using a ZIP tool to compress the files. ZIPPING
Word files can reduce file size appreciably.

Cindy Meister
INTER-Solutions, Switzerland
http://homepage.swissonline.ch/cindymeister (last update Jun 8 2004)


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

Thank you for the reply - so you don't think using a master doc with
sub-documents will help?
Graham

 

[Cindy M -WordMVP-]

Hi Gts,

so you don't think using a master doc with
sub-documents will help?

Given the instability of the Master Document feature, I
wouldn't want to attempt it, no. It was really only
designed for "pull it together, create
TOC/Index/Cross-refs, print it out, throw it away". It
doesn't do well in scenarios where you're relying on it
remaining stable through a process such as mail merge, then
essentially archiving.

Cindy Meister
INTER-Solutions, Switzerland
http://homepage.swissonline.ch/cindymeister (last update
Jun 8 2004)
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

 

[GTS]

Hi Gts,

Given the instability of the Master Document feature, I
wouldn't want to attempt it, no. It was really only
designed for "pull it together, create
TOC/Index/Cross-refs, print it out, throw it away". It
doesn't do well in scenarios where you're relying on it
remaining stable through a process such as mail merge, then
essentially archiving.

Cindy Meister
INTER-Solutions, Switzerland
http://homepage.swissonline.ch/cindymeister (last update
Jun 8 2004)

OK thank you.