Structure in Office

[Bob Phillips]

It is not as easy as it should be to move structure (e.g.
structured, indented, text) from one Office application to
another. The symptoms of what is wrong are outlined
below, together with a set of principles for fixing it.
How do I communicate this to Microsoft?



Word Outline creates structure based on headings, which
are automatically indented in Outline view. Indenting in
Word view can be established by building indentation into
the heading styles.

Converting from Word Outline to Word: On changing view to
Word, indentation is only retained if the heading styles
are set appropriately.
Converting to Table results in losing all the indentation
All text is converted into the Table - it is not possible,
say, to convert only heading levels 2 & 3. Text is
converted normally one paragraph (one Outline section) to
one cell in the Table.

Converting from Word Outline to Excel:
One can copy directly from Outline View into Excel - Text
goes into one column in Excel, one cell per Outline section
The text is indented within the column, but the
indentation structure DOES NOT TRANSLATE INTO COLUMNS
within Execl.

Copying a Word Table into Excel, all structure is lost.

One can convert from Word Outline to Powerpoint, although
the menu option "Send to" Powerpoint is a very odd
terminology - it makes one think of email. This
translation is effective only if the text is arranged with
all sections beginning with a level 1 heading in
Powerpoint.

One can copy structured text from Powerpoint back into
Word Outline

Other points about Excel:
FromExcel to Project, indented structure cannot be copied
to Project - one can only copy one column at a time

From Project, one can copy back into Excel


CONCLUSION - A universal, translatable structure
The following are the structural principles used in the
Office Applications/Frameworks:

Word Outline
Structure by Headings
Sections under headings delimited by paragraph marks

Word Table
Structure by columns
Cells within columns

Excel
Structure by columns
Cells within columns

Powerpoint
Structure by slides
Heading levels within slides

Project
Structure by Tasks
Tasks within Tasks

The Principles of Translation as they SHOULD be:

One should be able to automatically translate:
Word Outline Heading level >> Word Table Column >> Excel
Column >> Powerpoint Slide & Heading Level >> Project Tasks

The same structure should be reflected in each framework
as the content is moved from frame to frame. In each
separate framework (= Office Application), the mechanism
for expressing the structure should be that appropriate to
the framework. Conversion among frames should be free,
reversible, easy. Editing the structure in any one frame
should result in the changes being viewable in any other
frame.


[This message started life as a very structured text in
Word Outline. It is ironic that I should have to butcher
it to communiucate it to Microsoft.]

 

[Beth Melton]

Hi Bob,

I'm not sure what your question is here. This is a peer-to-peer
support newsgroup. If you want to direct something to Microsoft then
send it to (e-mail address removed).

Additionally, Outline View in Word is just that - a view of the
overall outline of a Word document based on the outline level of the
paragraph. (Format/Paragraphs).

The indents you see are not part of the document - only the view.

The answer for the 'universal, translatable structure' you seek is
called XML.

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

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

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

It is not as easy as it should be to move structure (e.g.
structured, indented, text) from one Office application to
another. The symptoms of what is wrong are outlined
below, together with a set of principles for fixing it.
How do I communicate this to Microsoft?



Word Outline creates structure based on headings, which
are automatically indented in Outline view. Indenting in
Word view can be established by building indentation into
the heading styles.

Converting from Word Outline to Word: On changing view to
Word, indentation is only retained if the heading styles
are set appropriately.
Converting to Table results in losing all the indentation
All text is converted into the Table - it is not possible,
say, to convert only heading levels 2 & 3. Text is
converted normally one paragraph (one Outline section) to
one cell in the Table.

Converting from Word Outline to Excel:
One can copy directly from Outline View into Excel - Text
goes into one column in Excel, one cell per Outline section
The text is indented within the column, but the
indentation structure DOES NOT TRANSLATE INTO COLUMNS
within Execl.

Copying a Word Table into Excel, all structure is lost.

One can convert from Word Outline to Powerpoint, although
the menu option "Send to" Powerpoint is a very odd
terminology - it makes one think of email. This
translation is effective only if the text is arranged with
all sections beginning with a level 1 heading in
Powerpoint.

One can copy structured text from Powerpoint back into
Word Outline

Other points about Excel:
FromExcel to Project, indented structure cannot be copied
to Project - one can only copy one column at a time

From Project, one can copy back into Excel


CONCLUSION - A universal, translatable structure
The following are the structural principles used in the
Office Applications/Frameworks:

Word Outline
Structure by Headings
Sections under headings delimited by paragraph marks

Word Table
Structure by columns
Cells within columns

Excel
Structure by columns
Cells within columns

Powerpoint
Structure by slides
Heading levels within slides

Project
Structure by Tasks
Tasks within Tasks

The Principles of Translation as they SHOULD be:

One should be able to automatically translate:
Word Outline Heading level >> Word Table Column >> Excel
Column >> Powerpoint Slide & Heading Level >> Project Tasks

The same structure should be reflected in each framework
as the content is moved from frame to frame. In each
separate framework (= Office Application), the mechanism
for expressing the structure should be that appropriate to
the framework. Conversion among frames should be free,
reversible, easy. Editing the structure in any one frame
should result in the changes being viewable in any other
frame.


[This message started life as a very structured text in
Word Outline. It is ironic that I should have to butcher
it to communiucate it to Microsoft.]

 

[Guest]

Hello, Beth

Thanks for the MSWish idea - I'll try it.

I did know that this is a peer-to-peer group, but I do not
have a question requiring a straight answer. It was more
in the way of an observation - it is odd that MS gets so
close to having structured documents passed effectively
from one framework to another, and yet they do not
complete the job. When you create structure in Word
Outline with appropriae heading styles, for instance, you
lose most of the structure when you convert to a Word
table, and you lose different parts of the structure when
you convert to Excel, and son on.

It just seems to be silly - spoiling the ship for a
ha'porth of tar.

And I do not think XML is the answer - or not just XML.
To say to Office users that they have to learn XML in
order to take advantage of structure in Office documents
seems like an admission of defeat.

Thanks for taking the trouble to answer.

 

[Rob Schneider]

Microsoft only adds features to their products that they think will have
a bottom-line impact on sales. If you think of your questions in that
perspective it's easier for you to come to a conclusion on "why"
something is the way it is.

The huge majority of buyers probably don't see a need for this. Someday
they might.

In computing, it is often hard to figure out the "why". Usually the
"why" is unfathomable but the fact is it will stay that why until it
changes. Then it will change to something not within our control. We
are just along for the ride. The "why" is not important. More
important is to figure out "how" to avoid it as a problem or work around it.

Hope this is useful to you. Let us know.

rms

 

[Guest]

Thanks for the input, rms. Your philosophy is laudable -
if you generalize it to the whole world then I guess that
you will find kinship with Zeno of Citium and the Stoics.

I rebel against it, though. Computer applications are
marvels of logic and mechanism. If there are pieces that
rub against each other awkwardly and create friction, then
it is in the spirit of computer application design that
these things should be adjusted.

The passing of indented text among all the applications in
Office seems to be such a fundamental piece of the logic
and architecture of Office that it should be offensive to
the Office designers that it is so fraught with holes.

You are right about workarounds - that is the prescription
for the short-term. I have workarounds (although I am
sure there are others to be discovered.) But workarounds
do not cure the itch for aesthetic satisfaction.


Bob

 

[Rob Schneider]

Ah, the zeno of Citium and the Stoics. thanks for that. I've completed
my day and learned something new! Interesting.

Funny enough, I have the same expectations as you and I like your phrase
"itch for aesthetic satisfaction". Well stated. I agree.

Just with these Office products things have gotten all too complicated,
even as they *appear* to get simpler. I long for Word for Windows 2.0
which I still think was the best word processor ever. Back then styles
and the structure that styles and templates offered made sense and
worked. Things have gone backward. I'm convinced that the current
generation of developers in Microsoft have lost the purpose of styles
and templates. Accordingly, to do what you want ... and I understand ...
isn't something that will appear soon and to say any more of the "why"
that i've just said is pure speculation.

Unlike you, I sense that the future in making this happen will be using
XML (the "how") ... since it respects the hierarchy that you are
seeking. Let's be hopeful.

Meantime ... focus energy on workarounds!

Hope this is useful to you. Let us know.

rms

 

[Guest]

-----Original Message-----

Unlike you, I sense that the future in making this happen

will be using >XML (the "how") ... since it respects the
hierarchy that you are seeking. Let's be hopeful.

Meantime ... focus energy on workarounds!

Thank you, sir, and I will continue to workaround.

As for the XML advice, I guess I should bow to wiser
heads. So - I have a request for guidance:

I am an Office user; definitely not a programmer. I can
just about use Excel macros if I have to. But I am an
adept at the the things that are "native" to Office -
shunting structure text between Wor and PPT and Excel, and
using Excel parsing commands to plit up structure, etc.
With that sort of background - where do you suggest I
start in learning about the brave new world of XML?