Those hard-wired Word style names

[patrick j]

Hi

I'm wondering a bit about those hard-wired word style names.

Some of them are very obvious as to what they mean, such as:

Heading 1
Heading 2

etc.

But looking more thoroughly through the list I see things like:

Intense Quote

and

Subtle Emphasis

There is nothing actually defined in these styles. Given that the user can
create any style they like to me it seems odd to have hard-wired these
rather more specific ones.

Maybe there is a reason for them being there which I am missing?

 

[John McGhie]

Hi Patrick:

Yes: The ones you mention are part of the Document Themes mechanism.

The whole Document Parts, Style Sheets, XML Transforms and Themes mechanism
is very very "vestigal" in the current Mac Word. Something like 90 per cent
of the functionality is missing.

However, those styles enable the whole Document Parts concept to work. As
you switch document parts in and out, and particularly as you change themes,
those styles are populated to control the appearance of all the parts in the
document.

A Theme is basically an application of the cascading style sheets that
become possible in an XML-based format. The style sheets switch the
formatting of the styles: for that to work, the names of certain styles have
to be "known" and pre-defined in the document.

This will be a lot easier to understand if we ever get the Ribbon's
Developer tab and XML Structure View from Word 2007. The engine is very
powerful, but in Mac Word, most of the controls are missing from the
dashboard. This version, at least, is kinda stunted

It's probably a good idea to treat those styles as "Reserved Names".
Otherwise there is a potential for very high entertainment value if your
document ever needs to be edited in Word on the PC

Cheers

Hi

I'm wondering a bit about those hard-wired word style names.

Some of them are very obvious as to what they mean, such as:

Heading 1
Heading 2

etc.

But looking more thoroughly through the list I see things like:

Intense Quote

and

Subtle Emphasis

There is nothing actually defined in these styles. Given that the user can
create any style they like to me it seems odd to have hard-wired these
rather more specific ones.

Maybe there is a reason for them being there which I am missing?

--
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, Consultant Technical Writer
McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltd
http://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
Sydney, Australia. S33°53'34.20 E151°14'54.50
+61 4 1209 1410, mailto:[email protected]

 

[patrick j]

It's probably a good idea to treat those styles as "Reserved Names".
Otherwise there is a potential for very high entertainment value if your
document ever needs to be edited in Word on the PC

Hi

Thank you for that information. By the above are you saying, don't use
them?

I guess if I use them in appropriate contexts then if the document goes to
a PC with the document theme engine fully working then my version of the
respective style will most likely be in context when the new theme changes
it?

To be honest I don't know anyone who uses Word with any intelligence at
all. In years of getting documents from other people I think on only a
couple of occasions have I seen the use of paragraph spacing, they always
use empty paragraphs to create space.

They don't bother to define styles. They use a series of empty paragraphs
to push text to a new page instead of a page break.

The list is endless.

The idea of them grappling with document themes is pretty remote

I must say that I may find it difficult to get my head around it myself.

 

[John McGhie]

Hi Patrick:

Thank you for that information. By the above are you saying, don't use
them?

"Using" them is fine. Just be aware that they are going to change, perhaps
radically, if someone applies a theme.

I guess if I use them in appropriate contexts then if the document goes to
a PC with the document theme engine fully working then my version of the
respective style will most likely be in context when the new theme changes
it?

That's my "guess" too. Trying to figure out what the appropriate context is
for each of them may not be easy ... There's no documentation on this yet.

To be honest I don't know anyone who uses Word with any intelligence at
all.

You do now! Clive is lurking in the background, Daiya is here, Bob is here,
Michel is here, I'm here ...

The idea of them grappling with document themes is pretty remote

Oh, they won't, and they are not intended to. Document Themes as it is
currently implemented provides a mechanism for *Word* to instantly make
global changes to the appearance of a template.

They choose a template, then they choose a "modern", "corporate", "in your
face" or "over the top" theme. I very much doubt if Microsoft will ever
create a "restrained" theme

I must say that I may find it difficult to get my head around it myself.

Yeah, me too. It's quite complex. Internally, it's a cascading stylesheet.

The trick is to figure out which design elements are going to change, and
how. The changes will be mainly "Colour". Each theme has a palette of
"Theme Colours". When you switch the theme, you switch the palette.

Now, all we have to do is figure out what happens to "ThemeColourHighlight1"
when the user switches themes.

Enjoy...

--
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, Consultant Technical Writer
McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltd
http://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
Sydney, Australia. S33°53'34.20 E151°14'54.50
+61 4 1209 1410, mailto:[email protected]

 

[Clive Huggan]

Hello Patrick,

I'm not yet using Word 2008, but I think the principle is the same as in
Word 2004. It has a style called "Emphasis", which is italic until/unless
you alter it; and Strong, which is bold. I can never remember which is
which.

I reduced the confusion by re-naming the styles, respectively:

Emphasis,i
Strong,b

Note that I didn't amend the style name itself; I only added a suffix (and
no space after the comma, you'll see).

I apply almost all my styles via the keyboard shortcut Command-Shift-s
followed by the suffix, followed by a hit of the Return key. Quick and
easy.

Therefore, to apply Heading 1 (which I have expanded "Heading 1,1") I key
Command-Shift-s followed by 1 followed by Return.

A discussion is in an article titled "How styles are applied" on page 93
(and elsewhere if you do a "Find" for "Shift-s") of some notes on the way I
use Word for the Mac, titled "Bend Word to Your Will", which are available
as a free download from the Word MVPs' website
(http://word.mvps.org/Mac/Bend/BendWordToYourWill.html).

[Note: "Bend Word to your will" is designed to be used electronically and
most subjects are self-contained dictionary-style entries. If you decide to
read more widely than the item I've referred to, it's important to read the
front end of the document -- especially pages 3 and 5 -- so you can select
some Word settings that will allow you to use the document effectively.]

Cheers,

Clive Huggan
Canberra, Australia
(My time zone is 5-11 hours different from North America and Europe, so my
follow-on responses to those regions can be delayed)
====================================================

 

[patrick j]

I apply almost all my styles via the keyboard shortcut Command-Shift-s
followed by the suffix, followed by a hit of the Return key. Quick and
easy.

Therefore, to apply Heading 1 (which I have expanded "Heading 1,1") I key
Command-Shift-s followed by 1 followed by Return.

That is a most interesting system. Something I miss greatly from Nisus
Writer (which I used for years on the classic OS) is the superb keyboard
short-cut system that program has.

I describe it in this web-page:

<http://www.patrickjames.me.uk/mac/nisuswriterexpress.html>

 

[John McGhie]

Hi Patrick:

Read the rest of Clive's "Bend Word", then you can create any system of
keystrokes you like in Word...

Cheers

That is a most interesting system. Something I miss greatly from Nisus
Writer (which I used for years on the classic OS) is the superb keyboard
short-cut system that program has.

I describe it in this web-page:

<http://www.patrickjames.me.uk/mac/nisuswriterexpress.html>

--
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, Consultant Technical Writer
McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltd
http://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
Sydney, Australia. S33°53'34.20 E151°14'54.50
+61 4 1209 1410, mailto:[email protected]

 

[patrick j]

Read the rest of Clive's "Bend Word", then you can create any system of
keystrokes you like in Word...

Hi John

Unfortunately you can't recreate the Nisus system

With the Nisus system you can use a modifier key (or keys) and a series of
regular keys as a short-cut.

To actually use this short-cut then you put one finger on the modifier and
then press the regular keys in sequence.

In Word, like every other program with "customiseable keyboard short-cuts",
you are only allowed combinations of modifiers and one regular key.

Word will only allow combinations of keys to be held down simultaneously
and only one can be a regular key.

To describe the Nisus system I will give a couple of examples.

To set keys for converting to uppercase you might set:

Command-UPP

With this you hold down the Command key and type UPP in sequence.

To set keys for lowercase you might set:

Command-LOW

With this you hold down the Command key and type LOW in sequence, just as
if you were actually typing the word "low" but with Command key held down.

Because multiple regular keys are used in sequence you can define vast
numbers of keyboard short-cuts and they remain very memorable because it is
easier to remember the quite descriptive series of letters.

When I was using Nisus Writer on the classic OS I remember I had nearly two
hundred of these keyboard short-cuts defined.