Sort

[DR]

In sorting a Word 2000 table, where one or more rows are marked as repeating
headers, the sort (Table | Sort) does not work properly unless I have
highlighted all the rows but the header row(s). Is this intended? Seems
that step shouldn't be necessary. Thanks.

 

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

Does it work if you don't select any rows? If the insertion point is in the
table and you use Table | Sort, the results should be as expected (all rows
sorted except the heading rows).

 

[DR]

No, it highlights the entire table and the wiz asks me Sort By and shows
only the text of the first (of two) header lines as the choice. Send the
file?

 

[Klaus Linke]

Hi DR,

If you have heading rows, the Sort dialog will show those headings instead
of the column numbers.

So if you have columns with headings "First name", "Last name", the dialog
will show "Sort by: First name" instead of "Sort by: Column 1".

Maybe that's what you are seeing? Did you try if the sort works ok?

Greetings,
Klaus

 

[DR]

Wish that's were the case. I have one row that's pure header, then a second
row with headings for the subsequent rows. Pretty standard. No matter what
I designate as repeating headers, the sort asks me whether I want to sort by
the text in the top row. If you mean something special or beyond this by
'heading rows' then maybe that's the problem, because all I have done is to
designate the first two rows as repeating headers (and as suggested above
also tried designating only the top row).

 

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

Word will take only the top heading row for this purpose, and if you have
merged cells, it's useless. You will have to sort by Column 1, Column 2,
etc., instead. Alternatively, you can split the table between the two
heading rows, sort, then delete the intervening paragraph to rejoin the
table.

 

[Klaus Linke]

I still don't get the problem. If I have 2 (or three, or 12) header rows in
the table, those aren't sorted.
So everything seems to be as it should be, or am I missing something?

Regards,
Klaus

 

[Klaus Linke]

So everything seems to be as it should be, or am I missing something?

.... well, apart from possible problems with merged cells ... and from the
problem that the headers in the first row may not be very meaningful...

Ok, I think I got it now ;-)
Klaus

 

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

Klaus, try merging the cells in your top row. Then you'll see what the OP is
facing. I'm not saying that Word won't omit all heading rows from sorting,
only that the names of the columns to be sorted on come from the top row.

 

[Klaus Linke]

mmmHokay ... I'm a bit slow on the uptake sometimes

Klaus

 

[DR]

I am perfectly happy to get Column 1, etc. as the sort choices rather than
the alphanumeric content of row 2. But I'm not getting that in Sort by,
unless I first highlight all the rows other than the two header rows.

To review, there is a merged header row, then a second row that isn't
merged, then the rows to be sorted. On Table | Sort, the only thing that
appears in Sort by is the alphanumeric content of row 1. The routine
simply cannot handle a merged row in the picture. Also, if you try the same
thing with an unmerged row 1 instead, the routine works but the choices are
incorrectly shown as the content of row 1 if there is an entry in the
column, and Column # if not.

Bottom line -- Word doesn't work with more than one header row.

 

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

A solution has been offered. Take it or leave it.

 

[DR]

Gee, I think you are misreading both the tone and the content of my post.
1- I wasn't complaining about your helpfulness, which I appreciate.
2- Your response is not accurate. It is not correct that, where there are
two header rows, I "will have to sort by Column 1...". That is not an
option.

 

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

I also suggested "Alternatively, you can split the table between the two
heading rows, sort, then delete the intervening paragraph to rejoin the
table."

 

[Rees]

Try telling that one to 180 operators who can barely spell 'winword'.

 

[Klaus Linke]

Hi Rees,

If you can do without repeating headers, you could split the table after
the headers and format the paragraph mark between the tables as "hidden".

Greetings,
Klaus

 

[Klaus Linke]

If you can do without repeating headers, you could split the table after

the headers and format the paragraph mark between the tables as "hidden".

....or better, do the split after the row(s) with merged cells.

Klaus