 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussionsAccessExcelInfoPathOutlookPowerPointPublisherWordDirectoryUser Groups Related Topics Outlook ExpressInternet ExplorerWindowsMS Server ProductsMore Topics ... |
MS Office Forum / Word / Long Documents / June 2005word 2003 can't open word 2000 docs
Hi, I get this error when using Word 2003 to open files saved in Word 2000. Word experienced an error trying to open the file. Try these suggestions. * Check the file permissions for the document or drive. * Make sure there is sufficient free memory and disk space. * Open the file with the Text Recovery converter. I can open them with the Text Recovery (as well as still with Word 2000), but there would be hours of formatting back together again. Right now my solution is to open them in Word 2000, but I am giving up features I was just beginning to get used to. Word 2000 offer regular RTF and one called: Word 97-2003 & 6.0/95 - RTF (*.doc) Are these alternatives likely to result in minimal unformatting? thanks, -john G'day "john gibb" <jgibb1@earthlink.net>, Yes-ish. The more you devolve the file format, the less chance of corruption remaining. Try a Maggie first though: <From Word 2k> Cut n paste everything except the last paragraph mark in each section to a new document. Then retry opening that new document in 2003. If that doesnt work, try Save As HTML before using the file format you suggested. Steve Hudson - Word Heretic steve from wordheretic.com (Email replies require payment) Without prejudice john gibb reckoned: >Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > >-john Hi Steve, I don't quite understand. I was wondering about "Save as.." in RTF but you are suggesting 'Save As...' in HTML; correct? Will HTML result in less formatting loss than RTF--when I reopen and resave in Word 2003? I eventually need to save the file in Word format (hopefully 2003) and then, with Acrobat 6 or 7 I believe, convert the Word to PDF with all the hyperlinks preserved. thanks, -john > G'day "john gibb" <jgibb1@earthlink.net>, > [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] >> >>-john Hi John Save As HTML (unfiltered) keeps all the Word formatting. I haven't used Save As RTF for many years - it used to lose Word 97 + numbering but there may have been updates to either the format or the reimport since then. The "Maggie" is copying and pasting to a new document, leaving the last paragraph mark behind, hopefully along with the corruptions. -- Margaret Aldis - Microsoft Word MVP  SignatureSyntagma partnership site: http://www.syntagma.co.uk Word MVP FAQ site: http://www.word.mvps.org > Hi Steve, > [quoted text clipped - 64 lines] >>> >>>-john G'day "Margaret Aldis" <Margaret.Aldis@mvps.(SpamStopper)org.invalid>, It doesnt keep all formatting (eg small caps) but it does go way closer. Steve Hudson - Word Heretic steve from wordheretic.com (Email replies require payment) Without prejudice "Margaret Aldis" <Margaret.Aldis@mvps.(SpamStopper)org.invalid> reckoned: >Hi John > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >The "Maggie" is copying and pasting to a new document, leaving the last >paragraph mark behind, hopefully along with the corruptions. Hi Steve, Hmmm. Could that be font or style specific? I saved a test file as HTM from Word 2003 that had some text direct formatted with Small caps and a paragraph style with Small Caps. Closed Word 203 and reopened the app and the file and the small caps were intact. ======= It doesnt keep all formatting (eg small caps) but it does go way closer. Steve Hudson - Word Heretic >> SignatureBob Buckland ?:-) MS Office System Products MVP *Courtesy is not expensive and can pay big dividends* G'day "Bob Buckland ?:-\)" <75214.226(At Beautiful Downtown)compuserve.com>, Word 2k used to work the way I described. Steve Hudson - Word Heretic steve from wordheretic.com (Email replies require payment) Without prejudice "Bob Buckland ?:-\)" <75214.226(At Beautiful Downtown)compuserve.com> reckoned: >Hi Steve, > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Steve Hudson - Word Heretic >> Hi Margaret, I didn't see the _unfiltered_ distinction for HTML in Word 2000's 'Save As' file types. Both Save As: a) HTML and b) Word 97-2003 & 6.0/95 - RTF (*.doc) seemed to create a file that Word 2003 is happy to open. And a spot check of the formatting in both makes me think everything, including Table-of-Contents hyperlinks and page numbering, was preserved. But I question my test. Can anyone suggest what other formatting I should now insure has been preserved, so I don't discover a problem when my deadline is more imminent? Also, if I had to choose one 'Save As' file format, filesize would lead me, decidedly, to HTML; notice this size comparison: original Word 2000 file: 183KB HTML version: 249KB Word 97/2003 RTF: 2592KB especially since one of my problem docs, in Word 2000 format, is 26 MB!! thanks, -john PS: i am on a Acrobat 7 trial and it seems happy to create PDF, with preserved hyperlinks, for either Word 2003 or 2000 > Hi John > [quoted text clipped - 81 lines] >>>> >>>>-john G'day "john gibb" <jgibb1@earthlink.net>, >Will HTML result in less formatting loss than RTF--when I reopen and resave >in Word >2003? Yes. Steve Hudson - Word Heretic steve from wordheretic.com (Email replies require payment) Without prejudice john gibb reckoned: >Hi Steve, > [quoted text clipped - 62 lines] >>> >>>-john
|
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.