We have tried in this column to cover word processing issues useful for many types of organizations, drawing on experience from the practice of law. The issue of accurate word count makes that challenging. for those who aren’t lawyers (or more specifically, litigators). Please bear with us.

In Anthony Desilva, et al. v Joseph G. Dileonardi, US Marshal, Etc. (http://laws.findlaw.com/7th/991754A.html) the court excused a party from sanctions for exceeding the limit of the number of words permitted in a brief by Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 32(a)(7). The court wrote in an opinion dated July 21, 1999:

Appellants’ brief was prepared with Microsoft Word 97, and an unfortunate interaction occurred between that software and the terms of Rule 32. All recent versions of Microsoft Word (Word 97 for Windows, Word 98 for Macintosh, and Word 2000 for Windows), and some older versions that we have tested, count words and characters in both text and footnotes when the cursor is placed anywhere in the document and no text is selected. In recent versions on both Windows and Macintosh platforms, choosing the Word Count function brings up a window listing the number of characters and words in the document. A checkbox at the bottom of the window reading “Include footnotes and endnotes,” when selected, yields a word count for all text and notes. But if the user selects any text in the document this checkbox is dimmed, and the program counts only the characters and words in the selected text. Microsoft Word does not offer a way to count words in those footnotes attached to the selected text.

This complicates implementation of Fed. R. App. 32(a)(7), which limits the allowable length of a brief to 14,000 words, and of a reply brief to 7,000 words. Under Rule 32(a)(7) (B)(iii), footnotes count toward this limit, but the “corporate disclosure statement, table of contents, table of citations, statement with respect to oral argument, any addendum containing statutes, rules or regulations, and any certificates of counsel do not count toward the limitation.” To determine the number of words that are included in the limit, counsel selects the “countable” body portions of the brief—which causes Microsoft Word to ignore countable footnotes. Counsel who do not notice that the count-footnotes box has been dimmed out may unintentionally file a false certificate and a brief that exceeds the word limits. That’s what happened to appellants’ lawyers. Older versions of Word have separate columns for text and footnote counts (plus a summation column), giving a visible cue that footnotes were not being counted when text had been selected, but current versions give only a consolidated count. When the count-footnotes checkbox is dimmed, even counsel who are aware that the brief contains footnotes may suppose that the software included these automatically. … Long-run solutions to this problem must come either from Microsoft Corporation—which ought to make it possible to obtain a count of words in footnotes attached to selected text—or from the national rulemaking process. We will send copies of this opinion to those responsible for such design decisions. In the meantime, we will flag this issue in the court’s Practitioner’s Guide and in materials distributed to counsel when an appeal is docketed. Law firms should alert their staffs to the issue pending a resolution at the software level. Our clerk’s office will spot-check briefs that have been prepared on Microsoft Word, are close to the word limit, and contain footnotes. Noncomplying briefs will be returned, and if the problem persists after there has been ample time for news to reach the bar we will consider what else needs to be done. (Counsel who use Word are not entitled to a litigating advantage over those who use WordPerfect.) For now, however, sanctions are inappropriate, and the order to show cause is discharged. “

Microsoft has now released a macro solution. It can be found at http://officeupdate.microsoft.com/2000/downloadDetails/swcmacro.htm for Word 97 and Word 2000, 137kb download.

The solution is packaged in a file called swmacro.dot. It adds a “Selection Word Count” toolbar. That contains a launch button for a macro that will report the word count for selected text, with options for including or excluding the word count of footnotes and endnotes referenced by that text. The options are enabled by default.

Installation instructions can be found on the web page and further details are included in the text of the template itself. The download contains a self-executing zipped file, the execution of which launches Word and opens a document derived from swmacro.dot. It includes macro buttons that will either copy swmacro.dot to the Word startup directory, or include its code in normal.dot. The installation instructions include descriptions of necessary temporary changes to macro security settings during the installation process.

Law practices and others who wish to enable this solution may find it simpler to have central staff extract swmacro.dot from swmacro.exe. This can be done a zip file tool. For many users, copying swmacro.dot to their Word startup directory so that it is a global template will work fine. Organizations that have already implemented a procedure for updating files in the startup directory and should use it here. This will avoid the need for individual users making changes in security settings. This also avoids reliance on normal.dot.

The word count for this column (minus the title) is 900 (with 538 words quoted from the 7^th Circuit). Only lawyers could care so much?

This 1999 article originally appeared in Office Watch. Subscribe to Office Watch free at http://www.office-watch.com/.

[Originally published 1999.]

 

 Word of Law No. 18  began an exploration of the tasks, skills and division of labor for effective use and support of Microsoft Word by medium to large organizations. This column continues with the responsibilities and skills of the Microsoft Word help desk and development staff.

Help desk staff assist both general and master users in the application of the organization’s standards to document creation, editing and production. They have primary responsibility for troubleshooting the difficulties that inevitably occur. It should be no surprise that the skills required for these positions include all of the skills described for both general and master users. That statement is not trivial, and we will return to it. In addition, the support staff needs to master the techniques of diagnosis and cure. For instance, if the organization’s use of Microsoft Word has embraced the Laws of Styles, the help desk staff needs to know how to examine a misbehaving document for direct formatting, and the techniques for stripping that formatting and applying proper styles.

The help desk staff needs to understand the entire range of documents produced by the organization and the solutions adopted by the organization for their formatting. This can make for some interesting staffing challenges. On the one hand, help desk staff who have grown through the ranks from general user through master user may have the best knowledge of the real life requirements for document production. On the other, the help desk staff should teach and promote the organization’s standard solutions. These may differ from the field experience, and help desk staff should be flexible enough to master the new solutions.

The help desk staff are in an especially good position to identify needs for improvement or development of the Microsoft Word environment. They can and should identify customizations not yet incorporated in the organization’s standard templates, AutoText or other customization of the Word environment. They should be encouraged keep a log of such incidents and suggestions.

For these responsibilities, the help desk staff requires yet a deeper understanding of Microsoft Word. They need to understand the role of templates, styles, AutoText, macros toolbars and menus. They need to understand what functions can be performed by each of these, even if they don’t know how to program or modify them. They need to be adept with the research tools for Microsoft Word, including the help files, Microsoft’s Support Knowledge Base, newsgroups and the library of third party books.

One way to think of trainers is help desk staff who have been released from their desk and moved to the front of the classroom. Of course, success in training requires skills in teaching and public speaking, which we need not review here. My point is that the trainers should offer most of the skills and knowledge we have just described for the help desk. Above all, they need to understand and promote the solutions the organization has developed for its use of Microsoft Word. For trainers permanently employed by an organization, this is relatively straightforward. The growth path from help desk to trainer, as outlined here, can accomplish it well. When an organization acquires its training from an outside vendor, the task becomes more challenging. The training vendor should learn the organization’s environment and tools, and customize the curriculum to incorporate them.

Developers

Developers bear responsibility for the back end of an organization’s use of Microsoft Word. They build its standards, including templates, styles, AutoText and macros. They need to master Visual Basic for Applications to enable templates to take advantage of its capabilities for customization and user input. They need to master the design and creation of forms, if used by an organization, and how to program the use of forms with VBA. They need to understand how Microsoft Word can communicate with other applications, especially Microsoft Outlook or a document management system, to obtain or share information.

The capabilities and potential of VBA as an applications development environment has made “real” programming talent an essential part of an organization’s Microsoft Word skills. Here, though, there is a significant potential for a disconnect. This staffing model has been based on an accumulation of skills, each level building on and expanding from the earlier levels. Finding staff with all of the skills we have described for help desk who can then master VBA may be challenging. Similarly, staff hired because of their programming experience may not have sufficient experience or skill in the actual document production. It may not be possible to have all of these skills in one person or group of persons, but being conscious of the issue can help.

In the next column, we will examine the responsibilities for coordinating and directing these responsibilities through the role of a system architect. We will also look at the lessons for smaller organizations and individuals.

This 1999 article originally appeared in Office Watch.Subscribe to Office Watch free at http://www.office-watch.com/.

[Originally Appeared 1999.]

Also, many of you corrected my statement in Word of Law No. 12 about the spacing Word inserts after a period or stop. Several pointed out that in both mono and proportionally spaced type, the spacing is the same as a word space. There should be some extra spacing, such as the space occupied by an “n-dash.” An n-dash is longer than a single space.

The various teams at Microsoft differ in their approach. The text that the newsletter wizard includes in the sample templates uses single spaces after periods. A fun way to generate sample text for testing and demonstration purposes (mention in WOW previously) is to type “=rand(2,2)” in an empty paragraph, then press the ENTER key. Word will produce the following text:

The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog. The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.

Word automatically inserted two spaces after the periods. The (2,2) in the command above can be replaced by other numbers, where the first is the number of paragraphs and the second is the number of sentences in each paragraph. There are limits, but I have not tested them.

Following Microsoft’s lead, perhaps this issue is best left as “we agree to disagree.”

This 1999 article originally appeared in Office Watch.Subscribe to Office Watch free at http://www.office-watch.com/.

[Originally appeared 1999.]

The e-mail in the brief time since last week’s column brought some additional uses for empty paragraphs and a suggestion for another “law.” Several users noted the use of empty paragraphs to separate adjacent tables, or to separate tables from surrounding text. Another pointed out that authors of e-mail messages who use Word as a text editor may need empty paragraphs to make plain text messages legible.

The law: Avoid extra tabs, especially in columnar presentations. For effective and reliable formatting of columnar material, each column should be separated by a single tab. This rule applies to simple columns of information. Any presentation with enough columns or complexity should be formatted with a table.

Don’t forget the benefits of styles for this formatting. The tab settings for those columns can and should be incorporated in a style named for the number or type of columns. Then if the formatting must shift, a change of the format of the style will change all of the entries.

The writer who suggested this law complained that time and again he received documents that included only default tabs, with as many as necessary to separate the columns.

There is a deeper issue here. Not a law, but a motto: Typing, get over it!

The standards and habits of the era of mechanical typing have been very hard to stamp out, even after nearly more than 20 years of word processing. When one had to change tabs settings mechanically, it was possible, but not practical, to change settings for special parts of a document. Typists left their tabs one half inch (or the metric equivalent) apart, and tabbed repeatedly. Many, perhaps most, still do.

In the era of non proportional fonts, typists were taught to type two spaces after a period. All word processing programs have been designed to include extra space automatically in proportionally spaced fonts. Type one space. After years of preaching this rule to enormous resistance, I can cite as authority Rule 2.1.4 of Robert Bringhurst’s elegant book, “The Elements of Typographical Style.” http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Typographic-Style-Robert-Bringhurst/dp/0881792063

If only we could learn to present the documents of law practice and other organizations with the clarity, beauty and love of print he offers.

This 1999 article originally appeared in Office Watch.Subscribe to Office Watch free at http://www.office-watch.com/

[Originally appeared 1999.]

This week’s column will be a brief excursion to Laws of Styles #6, originally stated in Word of Law No. 1. The rule was brief enough, “Use no empty paragraphs.”

Please do not read this and the other “laws” as absolute, unbreakable rules. In the real world, a code of law must be interpreted and adapted. The Laws of Styles were intended to be broad, brief and a bit provocative.

The absence of empty paragraphs helps assure consistency of formatting, and allows formatting to be transformed accurately. There are, however, several circumstances where it is neither practical, nor appropriate to avoid them completely. It takes enormous discipline, for instance, to avoid using empty paragraphs to separate the closing line of a letter from the author’s name, or similar spacing in other types of signature blocks.

A “pure” approach would create the space by setting the Space After setting of the Closing Line paragraph style to a large enough number to open up the space. Even so, there may be good reasons to leave an empty paragraph mark. David Kiefer was kind enough to point out that such empty paragraphs may be used by programs such as RightFax for signature codes.

In planning a template for use with macros, empty paragraphs may be necessary or desirable to assure that text gets inserted in the proper place and style. Document assembly tools such as Matthew Bender/Capsoft’s HotDocs use empty paragraphs liberally as part of their template coding pattern. During the macro or assembly process, all or nearly all of the empty paragraphs should disappear or be filled.

So, our amended/corrected/interpreted rule/guide/suggestion could be, “Use very few empty paragraphs in finished documents.” No one would ever remember it. Let’s keep calling these rules “laws,” and keep up the discussion to learn how to use them well.

This 1999 article originally appeared in Office Watch.Subscribe to Office Watch free at http://www.office-watch.com/.

[Originally appeared 1999.]

Last week’s column started out with the simple mission of explaining how to restart paragraph numbering, but left us on the connection between customization of numbering settings and the Windows registry.

Before diving back into the behavior and misbehavior of Word, it helps to restate the business goals for automatic numbering. An organization should be able to publish to its users a set of standard numbering alternatives. The numbering patterns should be linked to a set of styles, generally Heading 1 through Heading 9. Users should be able to apply the numbering patterns consistently throughout the organization, regardless of the computer on which the numbering has been applied.

Further, users should be able to restart numbering within a document, and keep the style application correct. If a document contains one or more numbering restarts, and a different numbering pattern needs to be applied, the document should not lose the numbering restart.

Several of you have written asking whether we could just state some easy advice on proper and accurate use of automatic numbering in Word 97 and Word 2000. An answer (not the only answer), separates numbering application from numbering design and customization. For numbering application, an organization’s experts should prepare a series of templates that contain only the appropriate numbering patterns, linked to styles that have been formatted correctly. General users can apply numbering patterns and related style settings by selecting one of these templates in the Style Gallery. Numbering restart requires some care, probably best supported by a macro. In any case, general users should stay away from use of the Bullets and Numbering dialog’s Outline Numbered tab. There needs to be a troubleshooting guide to deal with difficulties, especially from sharing work with those who haven’t mastered these rules.

Once again, this column won’t finish the subject. The final answer will remain the one in the previous paragraph. We hope the detailed explanation with help explain and justify the advice.

Returning to the perspective of the expert user or developer and the customization of an outline numbered pattern, we must now deal directly with the Bullets and Numbering dialog’s Outline Numbered tab. I have sometimes called this dialog the ListGallery after the name of the Word object with which the dialog is associated. The tab displays 8 windows, of which the upper left one always indicates “None.” The other seven windows display a portion of the settings and formatting for numbering derived from a group of presets stored in the individual user’s Windows Registry. For the curious, in Word 97 they are stored at HKEY_USERS\.DEFAULT\Software\Microsoft\Office\8.0\Word\List Gallery Presets. For Word 2000, the setting is the same, except that 8.0 is replaced by 9.0. Don’t get too excited. The registry entries are a string of digits, not easily decipherable.

There are some oddities (a polite euphemism) in the display of the Outline Numbered dialog. The appearance of the windows depends on the paragraph in the cursor is located. If the windows remain or have been reset to their default values and the cursor is not in a numbered paragraph linked to a style, then the windows in the top row will not have numbering levels linked to styles, but the windows in the bottom level will. If the cursor is in a paragraph at a heading numbering level lower than 1 (say level 4), then all the levels in the windows in the Outline Numbered dialog will appear in the order Current Level (here level 4), Level 1 and Level 2. In the same document, putting the cursor in a paragraph without numbering caused the two windows in the lower right corner of the Outline Numbered dialog to lose their connection to the linked styles.

I could go on, but let’s consider at least some of what happens with the use of the customize function launched from the Outline Numbered dialog.

In the terms described in the column in issue 4.29, drawing strongly on the Word object model, the Customize Outline Numbered List dialog allows users to control nearly all of the properties of the List Levels associated with the ListTemplate assigned to the active window of the ListGallery from which the customize dialog was launched. One can demonstrate this by recording a macro in which such a customization is performed. Take a look at the macro. About four pages of VBA code shows up. Changing any characteristic of any outline level causes Word to rewrite all of the properties of all of the ListLevels associated with the ListTemplate assigned to that gallery position. The built-in programming (but not the dialog (!) can reset the TabPosition property (the Jason Tab behavior). At the end of the macro, Word applies that ListTemplate to the List in which the current paragraph is included.

Feel free to reread the last paragraph a few times. It isn’t easy.

Any time a user changes number formatting through the Customize Outline Numbered List dialog, they rewrite the settings for the connected Window of the ListGallery. This rewriting occurs in the Windows registry for that machine. The application of the revised ListTemplate to the list in the document causes the document to pick up the new settings. This may work properly in a pure single user setting, with a simple document. If there is only one List in the document (no paragraph numbering restarts, among other things), then the new settings can apply correctly. Trouble starts brewing quickly if a user tries to customize numbering settings from work produced by another. If they have previously customized their Outline Numbered settings, it may differ from the organization’s standards, and “corrupt” the document.

All of this behavior helps explain the urgency of the development of numbering formats by those who have mastered these issues, and sharing them through templates and the Style Gallery.

This 1999 article originally appeared in Office Watch.Subscribe to Office Watch free at http://www.office-watch.com/.

[Originally appeared 1999.]

After a few weeks pause, let’s return to automatic numbering. The e-mail on this issue continues to include strong expression. There was even a discussion thread on a WordPerfect newsgroup (although not sent to me), citing this column as an explanation why not to change from WordPerfect to Word. This column is not about competition between word processors. The column is devoted to excellent use of Microsoft Word to create, edit, and complete the documents of large organizations, with a focus on those of legal practice. In doing so, it is helpful and essential to understand the relationship of WordPerfect and Word, as last week’s column on Reveal Codes emphasized. If this discussion succeeds, then users of both word processors can learn to do their work better.

The previous columns on numbering became fairly complex, so it would be nice to tackle one “simple” issue, such as restarting a numbering sequence in the middle of a document. Would that “simple” be the proper adjective. Your comments and many others have described a variety of problems that can occur when restarting, including the changes in tabs and indents described in issue Word of Law No. 3. The numbering restarts may disappear when a new numbering scheme is applied. What is happening? Can all these problems be avoided?

Be warned. There is no way to fully explain the issues raised by a numbering restart without getting quite technical about Word’s structure, commands and operation. My aim is to challenge WOW’s readers to understand Word more thoroughly, and the crew at Microsoft to address carefully what they have constructed as they design improvements for Word 10.

Assume that a document has been formatted with a sequence of Heading 1 through Heading 9 styles, with each linked to an appropriate numbering format. Most documents do not require all 9 levels. Somewhere in the middle of the document (such as after the main body of the text ends and the exhibits or appendixes begin), the Heading 1 paragraph numbers need to restart with “1.”

One would imagine some sort of “simple” code that would cause the renumbering to occur. The paragraph where it occurs would need a property that starts the numbering again. Each continuous sequence of numbered paragraphs is a List, so the paragraph with the numbering restart needs to start a new list. So, we need a command that makes the numbering property of a paragraph (its ListFormat) start over. One could imagine a command like :

Selection.Range.ListFormat ContinuePreviousList:=False

Sorry, misplaced imagination. An example of working macro code that permits Word 97 to do restart paragraph numbering, generated (along with much else) from the “Restart” button on the Bullets and Numbering dialog, reads:

Selection.Range.ListFormat.ApplyListTemplate ListTemplate:=ListGalleries( _ wdOutlineNumberGallery).ListTemplates(6), ContinuePreviousList:=False, _ApplyTo:=wdListApplyToWholeList

So, Word must “apply” something called a “ListTemplate” to the paragraph and to the List in order to restart numbering. And, what is that code retrieving the ListTemplate from the ListGalleries(wdOutlineNumberGallery)?

This command opens the window to the core of Word 97’s paragraph numbering. It will take a good deal more than this week’s column to explore it fully.

A ListTemplate is not a template as we know it for other purposes in Word. It is not a separate file, but an object in Word’s object model. It can attach to a document or a template. As one would expect, a document inherits the ListTemplates contained in the template on which it is based. A ListTemplate is a container that groups the numbering and related format controls for a List. Each ListTemplate consists of either 1 or 9 ListLevels, depending on whether the OutlineNumberedproperty of the ListTemplate is true. Each ListLevel has a series of properties that set its numbering format, including the three that conflict with (and override) the similar settings in style formatting: NumberPosition (equivalent to FirstLineIndent), TextPosition (equivalent to LeftIndent) and TabPosition (the source of the Jason Tab).

A document or template can accumulate many ListTemplates, although there is no direct way to view them. The tool we have built into Word for controlling the ListTemplate settings is the Bullets and Numbering dialog. For OutlineNumbered ListTemplates, the Customize dialog of the OutLine Numbered tab of that dialog includes controls for almost all of the ListTemplate ListLevel properties. “Almost,” because the dialog omits a control for the TabPosition property, leaving us to the programmed 0.25 inch setting.

Now look harder at where the macro code example found the ListTemplate it used for the paragraph numbering restart: ListGalleries(wdOutlineNumberGallery).ListTemplates(6). Instead of taking the ListTemplate from the document or its attached template, Word took it from one of the ListTemplates in yet another collection of objections called the ListGallery. There are three ListGalleries, corresponding to the three tabs on the Bullets and Numbering dialog. They each have a default set of ListTemplates associated with their positions. When customized, the settings of the List Gallery, including the associated ListTemplate, are stored in the individual user’s Windows registry.

I hope you find that last sentence worthy of a least a week’s thought. It has important implications for numbering standards in an organization and the behavior (or misbehavior) of documents with automatic numbering. Fear not, the exploration will continue.

This 1999 article originally appeared in Office Watch.  Subscribe to Office Watch free at http://www.office-watch.com/.

[Originally appeared 1999.]

The request for suggestions for improvements to Word in a prior issue has yielded a flood of e-mail. I have begun to sort through those. Some have already been forwarded to Microsoft. Others deserve highlighting in the column.

Among the comments from former WordPerfect users, there never ceases to be a desire to “Reveal Codes.” This column will share some tools and strategies for exposing Word’s formatting controls. Beyond that, we all can be helped by considering the functions of WordPerfect’s methods of revealing its codes and whether Word could benefit from further development.

Why are WordPerfect users so devoted to revealing codes? Since the beginning of WordPerfect, users could view the codes that control its formatting in a split window. In this viewing mode, the document text appears in the upper portion of the screen, while the text together with formatting codes is “revealed” in the lower portion of the screen. As a user navigates through the text, the matching codes follow. This function has been maintained from the DOS through the Windows versions of WordPerfect.

Nearly all of the formatting of a WordPerfect document is controlled by the codes revealed in that lower portion of the screen. The WordPerfect user can modify or delete the codes by editing directly in the code window.

Microsoft’s official position about former WordPerfect user’s need to reveal codes was expressed briefly in Chapter 4 of the Office 97 Resource Kit:

In WordPerfect, users reveal codes to find and correct many errors. There is no need for reveal codes in Word 97. Word is WYSIWYG – what you see is what you get. Users see exactly what a document looks like on the screen. Sometimes, however, it is helpful to see what formatting has been applied to text or a graphic image. The Reveal Formats feature allows this. http://www.microsoft.com/Office/ORK/021/021.htm#ORK021C3

Since the release of Word 97, Microsoft has offered a more complete guide in its White Paper: Word 97: Life After Reveal Codes. http://support.microsoft.com/support/downloads/DP2461.ASP

EXPOSING FORMATS AND OTHER CONTROLS IN WORD

There are several tools that help expose the formatting of a Word document. Before a user (especially one who grew up on WordPerfect) can be fully comfortable with these, they must understand the structure of a Word document. The Life After Reveal Codes White Paper emphasizes these issues. By starting The Word of Law column in issue 4.20 with the Laws of Styles, we offer a strategy that maximizes effective use of Word’s document structure, and minimizes the hidden aspects of Word’s formatting. At the start, the WordPerfect user must learn that Word does not have the same kinds of codes as WordPerfect. Learning the way Word really works is the best way to avoid difficulties.

Still, many times it helps to be able to see as much as possible what controls a Word document’s formatting.

One strategy for Word users is to make its Normal View as revealing as it can be . The settings are on the View tab of Tools|Options. In Word 97, these must be set while in Normal View. In Word 2000, the settings on this tab are always visible. In the “Show” group at the top of the dialog, turn on bookmarks and Field Codes. Set Field Shading to “Always.” Set Non-printing characters to “Show All.” At the bottom, set the Style Area Width to a number greater than 0, such as 1 inch.

Together, these settings expose spaces, tabs, paragraph marks, page breaks, section breaks, stylenames and field codes. For documents that follow the Laws of Styles, this approach reveals nearly all of the necessary formatting controls, especially if direct formatting has been minimized. Showing Field Codes can make a document hard to read, so many users will want to turn that function on temporarily for diagnostic purposes. With default keystroke assignments, ALT F9 toggles between showing and hiding Field Codes.

A problem with using the Tools|Options View tab as instructed above is that many of these choices will apply automatically to both Normal and Page Layout View. Page Layout looks much cleaner if nearly all of the formatting controls are not visible. We still recommend leaving the paragraph marks showing. To avoid the problem, the Normal View and Page Layout View settings should be controlled by macros. A really aggressive approach names the macros “ViewNormal” and “ViewPage.” Then they will take over from Word’s standard functions altogether.

The other tool for revealing formats is what the Resource Kit called the “Reveal Formats” feature. That is a good name for it, although you would be hard pressed to find the tool using that name. It can be found on the Help Menu as “What’s This?” and is assigned SHIFT F1 in the default keystroke layout. The macro name for the command is “HelpTool.” When used, it first shows a northwest pointing arrow with a question mark. By clicking the mouse on a character or paragraph mark, a balloon appears that reports the formatting and font applicable to that character or paragraph mark. I have not found a keystroke method for selecting the point revealed. The balloon identifies the formatting and font settings derived from the currently applicable style and those applied directly.

IMPROVEMENTS TO WORD

When we combine this understanding of WordPerfect’s and Word’s functions when they reveals codes and formats, potential improvements for Word emerge.

1.   Offer an ability to link navigation in split windows.  Word allows more than one window into a document. They  can be in different Views. If the top view were in Page  Layout and the bottom in Normal, with the configuration  changes described above, AND if the views would scroll  together, Word users would gain a function demonstrated  in WordPerfect’s Reveal Codes.

2.   Name the styles in the HelpTool balloon. The balloon  tells use the settings from the style, but leaves us to  look to the Format toolbar to find the name of the  style. Put all of the information in one place.

3.   Support an option where the HelpTool balloon  automatically appears when passing the mouse over a  paragraph mark. This could function similar to the popup  expansion of comments.

4.   Have the Style Name in the StyleArea Width report  whether the accompanying paragraph has direct  formatting. We know the hook exists, since the HelpTool  can tell us. What we need is to see this dynamically.

This 1999 article originally appeared in Office Watch.  Subscribe to Office Watch free at http://www.office-watch.com/.

[Originally appeared 1999.]

AutoText can be a very powerful element of a well planned Word environment for a law firm or other large organization. Frequently used names and phrases, letterhead mastheads, office addresses, logos, signature blocks, court captions and notarization paragraphs are just some of the types of material that can be stored as AutoText and should be maintained in standard text and format throughout the organization.

At the same time, AutoText can be a very effective personal tool, allowing users to store their own favorite phrases. In a large organization, we would like to enable users not only to personalize Word this way, but have it travel with them if they work on different computers. If more than one person works on the same computer, we would like each to have their own personal AutoText collection.

Word does not make achieving this goal easy.In fact, we have run into some traps trying to get there, and hope this and following columns promote a sharing of techniques to achieve it.

The key issue is where to store the AutoText entries. Word stores AutoText in templates. The fastest way to store an AutoText entry is to select the text, then press ALT F3 (with default keyboard assignments). This stores the entry in Normal.dot. That’s not the best place for an organization’s standard AutoText entries. We recommend they be stored in a separate Global Template. Let’s call it “OrgNameAutoText.dot” where OrgName should be replaced by initials or other name used for the organization in naming templates. That template should be maintained centrally and distributed to users, or kept in a network location. (That’s a topic for a column or two.)

Why not just incorporate these into Normal.dot? One reason is to share the organization standard AutoText entries, while allowing users to keep their own. Putting the organization wide AutoTexts into OrgNameAutoText.dot and allowing users to store theirs in Normal.Dot gets part of the way. Another, perhaps more important, reason, to keep AutoText entries (and, perhaps, nearly all customization) out of Normal.dot is that Normal.dot gets damaged from time to time, under virus attack or otherwise, and must be erased and replaced. This argues against storing personal AutoText entries in Normal.dot.

That leads to directing users to create their personal AutoText entries in a Personal.dot also to be loaded as a Global Template. The ALT F3 technique won’t do that. (By the way, the “New” button on the AutoText toolbar does the same thing.) AutoText entries also can be stored using the AutoText tab on the Tools|AutoCorrect dialog. The “AutoText” button in the first position on the standard AutoText toolbar opens this dialog pointed directly to the correct tab. At the bottom of the screen is an item titled “Look in:” That points to the template in which the AutoText entries are stored.

One needs the right rhythm here. If… a Personal.dot template has been implemented and is loaded as a global template and … if the user changes “Look in:” from “All active templates” to “Personal.dot,” … then Word will store the entry in Personal.dot.

This is too hard!

Can a macro come to the rescue? Yes, but not as easily as we would like. Word dialogs invite the macro writer to help the user by making these kind of detailed and confusing setting changes automatically. Here we would like to change Look in: to personal.dot while storing the personal AutoText, then change it back to All active templates immediately. Otherwise the organization standard AutoText entries will not be accessible. Word 97 does not have a macro setting that supports control of this dialog element, although many other dialogs do allow such control. I have not found a resolution in my explorations of Word 2000, and would welcome direction to one if it exists.

In future issues we’ll explore other macro strategies for AutoText support. We will look at the issues relating to portability of AutoText and multiple users on the same machine. We look forward to hearing about your experience.

This 1999 article originally appeared in Office Watch.  Subscribe to Office Watch free at http://www.office-watch.com/.

[Originally appeared 1999]

Word of Law No. 5 introduced some of the issues that arise when a law practice or other large organization ties to balance personal and enterprise wide use of AutoText.

A full set of functional goals for AutoText can be intricate. There may be one or more standard collections of AutoText entries. Some may be used across the entire organization; others may be used on a departmental basis. Still others may be specific to a particular type document. Firm logos or letterhead mastheads could be organization-wide. A department might have phrases in common use in their work. In law practice, a litigation department might use the proper names of courts and agencies in which they practice. Alternative or optional text segments such as forms of notarizations for real estate documents can be maintained as AutoText in a specific document template.

The organizational AutoText entries may be changed from time to time, and the changes need to be distributed to users. Users should be able to create their own AutoText entries and see them if they log on at different computers. Each user should see their personal AutoText entries if they share a computer.

Several of you have written detailed descriptions of the strategies you have adopted to meet the challenge. A writer from one law firm described their use of Normal.dot. They maintain a master copy on their network, including the firm wide AutoText entries. User customization, including their own AutoText entries, are stored in their copies of Normal.dot, which are backed up automatically to their network. Corruptions of Normal.dot are addressed by replacing it with the backup personal copy, or, if necessary, the backup network copy.

A writer from Scotland described a very “organization-centric” approach that leaves out personalization. In this approach, the organization global templates are maintained in a network directory for which only a small number of administrators have permission to write files. All other users are read-only. This assures the integrity of the AutoText in the global templates.

We attempted a solution to personal AutoText based on a Firm.dot or FirmAutoText.dot file for the organization wide AutoText entries and other customization. Personal customization of AutoText entries, toolbars and macros were to be stored in a “Userid.dot” where “Userid” is the user’s network identification. An AutoExec macro that runs when word starts would have loaded the Userid.dot file as a global template, as well as setting the custom dictionary to “Userid.dic.” The AutoExec macro would also compare the time and date of each of Userid.dot and Userid.dic to identically named files stored on the network, and synchronize the files to the more current copy. This method would support portability, sharing of individual machines, and coordination with laptop usage. The file used a Windows API call that returns the UserID. While these concepts worked within the macro itself, we ran into problems with it in the client’s environment. The concepts seem valuable enough to be worth sharing to see if others may have pursued and achieved a similar solution.

It should be no surprise that the connections between AutoText entries and styles present challenges and opportunities. Word 97 includes special links between an AutoText entry and the style in which it was created. These support the operation of the AutoTextList Field and the AutoText inserter menu on the standard AutoText toolbar. An AutoText entry is characterized by the style in which it was created (if the AutoText entry is less than a paragraph) or by its first paragraph (if the AutoText entry consists of more than one paragraph). On the AutoText toolbar, the AutoText insertion menu lists either “All Entries” if the cursor is in a Normal style paragraph, or in a paragraph for which no AutoText entries have been classified, as described above. If there are such AutoText entries, the menu changes to the name of the current style, and a pull down can be accessed with the names of the styles classified to that style.

The AutoTextList field can also use the style linkages. It has a switch that allows a style to be specified. If AutoText Entries have been classified to the style, only the ones assigned to the style assigned to the field will appear as choices when right clicking on the field. If no style is assigned to the field, all AutoText entries will be accessed.

This technique is used in the sample letter template from Microsoft for the alternative forms of salutation and closing.

One needs to be careful about the styles of text being stored in an AutoText entry. If the AutoText entry uses styles of the same name as the document in which the AutoText is being inserted, the text will take on the formats of those styles in the receiving document. For documents constructed in accordance with the Laws of Styles stated in issue 20, this behavior will be correct under most circumstances. If the AutoText entry is supposed to have a distinctive appearance unrelated to the balance of the formatting in the recipient document, it should be formatted with a styles named specially for this purpose.

This can have subtle consequences, which we will explore further in future columns. Note that if AutoText is to be inserted through macro code, to cause the AutoText to be inserted with its stored styles applied requires the RichText:=True. Notice the use of this command in the code listed below.

AUTOTEXT LISTING

A complex set of AutoText entries needs a set of management tools. The AutoText entries can be printed using the “Print what:” setting of “AutoText entries.” A more interesting approach is to create a document that lists the names and content of a template’s AutoText entries. The following code will list all of the AutoText entries in a document’s attached template. Be very careful to save before running the macro, since the macro deletes the text of the current document. We will describe strategies for use of these documents in a future column.

Sub ListAllAutoText()
Dim aText As AutoTextEntry
Dim i
Selection.WholeStory
Selection.Delete
For Each aText In ActiveDocument.AttachedTemplate.AutoTextEntries
On Error GoTo CreateAutoTextNameStyle
Selection.TypeParagraph
Selection.TypeText (aText.Name)
Selection.Style = “AutoTextName”

StatusBar = “Creating AutoText Entry ” & aText.Name
Selection.TypeParagraph

Selection.Style = “Normal”
aText.Insert Where:=Selection.Range, RichText:=True
Next aText
Selection.Style = “Normal”
Selection.TypeBackspace
Exit Sub

CreateAutoTextNameStyle:
ActiveDocument.Styles.Add Name:=”AutoTextName”, Type:=wdStyleTypeParagraph
Resume

End Sub

This 1999 article originally appeared in Office Watch.  Subscribe to Office Watch free at http://www.office-watch.com/.