 |
 | 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 / Mailmerge and Fax / May 2007W2K: labels thrown "out of whack" when cell or table margins changed? How to fix ... ?
I absolutely must have cell margins that are at about 0.05" around the insides of Avery-sized labels #5167. Before changing the margins, the pages of labels are aligned and positioned correctly. The instant I change them to 0.05", the rows all become misaligned and a standard sheet has a row pushed off to the next page. About halfway throught the first page, the labels contents are printing half off the labels. The text before and after the merge in no way is too much for each cell and I made sure that the "automatically resize to fit contents" option is not selected in the table options of the table properties so I'm at a loss to figure out what is going on. The labels are not always printing correctly from sheet to sheet as, I'm sure most with experience have found, different batches of labels come out slight differently placed. I've not done much mail merge or label work as was the case back in my old word-processing days, but at the time I had working templates with table margins that worked for any label batches that came along. Through trial and error one eventually finds the margins that work to the maximums of label production offset and 0.05" is about the minimum to accommodate these offsets. Certainly, 0.08" (tEventually a margin is found that accommodates all slight variations between label stocks. But if I can't change the margins and retain the integrity of labels, then I'm stuck. Does anyone know what to do in this situation? I don't know what else to look at. 0.05" is not even my preference for label margins. In WP days, I'd use the standard WP size of 0.05" and I used to use 5167 even back then. Stuck and hoping someone here knows a good solution to this. Thanks! :oD Leave labels alone and achieve the space that you are after by changing the formatting of paragraphs - Left and Right Indent, Space Before and Space After.  SignatureHope this helps. Please reply to the newsgroup unless you wish to avail yourself of my services on a paid consulting basis. Doug Robbins - Word MVP >I absolutely must have cell margins that are at about 0.05" around the >insides of Avery-sized labels #5167. Before changing the margins, the [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > Stuck and hoping someone here knows a good solution to this. Thanks! :oD Okay, however non-intuitive this solution would be, it is doing the job, thank goodness. I'm still having one problem. I'm getting an extra row at the bottom of the merged end document. The original target document has the correct spacing at the bottom, but the merged doct. puts in an extra row. In WP, I vaguely remember that the last field on the page needed an extra code (next record, or end record, or somesuch). Is this the same for Word? Pls advise. :oD > Leave labels alone and achieve the space that you are after by changing > the formatting of paragraphs - Left and Right Indent, Space Before and [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] >> Stuck and hoping someone here knows a good solution to this. Thanks! >> :oD Can you spell this out a bit? I read and re-read, but wasn't sure what exactly you are seeing. Is the extra row at the very end of the output, and what exactly does it contain (a duplicate of the last row of labels?) > In WP, I vaguely remember that the last field on the page needed an extra > code (next record, or end record, or somesuch). Is this the same for > Word? In Word 2000, the main thing to get right is "no { NEXT } field in the first label cell on the sheet, one { NEXT } field at the beginning of each label cell after that", bearing in mind that some cells in some layouts - such as 5167 - have "spacer" columns of cells that should not have anything in them. Peter Jamieson > Okay, however non-intuitive this solution would be, it is doing the job, > thank goodness. I'm still having one problem. I'm getting an extra row [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] >>> Stuck and hoping someone here knows a good solution to this. Thanks! >>> :oD > Can you spell this out a bit? I read and re-read, but wasn't sure what > exactly you are seeing. Is the extra row at the very end of the output, > and what exactly does it contain (a duplicate of the last row of labels?) Yes, certainly. And thanks for the question; it helped to look at this from a different angles to try to figure out what's wrong. Admittedly, I've not done many mail merges in Word. All that I used to do in my years as a word-processor when WP was the standard. I hadn't actually looked at the data, so hadn't realized that I was just getting one record repeated over and over <g>. My extensive WP experience helped out and I remembered that there, too, we had to put and "End Record" field in. Once I did that, this Word mail merge worked properly in that way, too. So here's the problem. 5167 has 4 columns of 20 rows (for a total of 80 labels). The original target label file has the standard 8x20. But the merged docts all come out at 8x21! I don't know how to fix this. I just thought of this, here's what in each cell in the original target label file: User: <<USER>> UIN: <<UIN>> Country: <<COUNTRY>> S/N: <<SN>> Model: <<Model>> P/N: <<PN>><<Next Record>> I bet you that this will make much clearer what I'm doing wrong. Each and every cell has the above coding but I'm not sure if this is completely right. Perhaps I'm missing something here, too, that is generating labels with an incorrect # of rows. >> In WP, I vaguely remember that the last field on the page needed an extra >> code (next record, or end record, or somesuch). Is this the same for [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > such as 5167 - have "spacer" columns of cells that should not have > anything in them. I might have misunderstood the above paragraph, but when I removed the "<<Next Record>>" (doesn't show up as "{ NEXT }" for me. I'm using an Excel file that I used to put in the fields, btw), in the first cell, the first 2 cells in the merged label output were repeated. So that's not what you're referring to, obviously <g>. Re the spacer columns, yes. There is nothing in those columns at all and they remain empty after the merge. So okay there. Is it possible to tell what I'm doing wrong judging from the coding above?? Thanks. :oD > Peter Jamieson > [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] >>>> Stuck and hoping someone here knows a good solution to this. Thanks! >>>> :oD > So here's the problem. 5167 has 4 columns of 20 rows (for a total of 80 > labels). The original target label file has the standard 8x20. But the > merged docts all come out at 8x21! I don't know how to fix this. The layout I get when I choose the 5167 option is 4x20. My best guess is that at some point along the way, you may have selected a table row and duplicated it by accident to make a 4x21 layout. To see what's happening, it may help to show the table gridlines - try Table|Gridlines. > User: <<USER>> > UIN: <<UIN>> > Country: <<COUNTRY>> S/N: <<SN>> > Model: <<Model>> P/N: <<PN>><<Next Record>> Some Word-oriented terminology: a. Mail Merge Main Document: the layout (or "template", but that does not necessarily mean a Word .dot template) - i.e. how you want your output to look, and where to put each item of data b. Mail Merge Data Source - the data you are going to merge into the Mail Merge Main Document c. Mail Merge Destination - could be a Destination Document or a Destination Printer, etc. In the Mail Merge Main Document, the first label cell should have: User: <<USER>> UIN: <<UIN>> Country: <<COUNTRY>> S/N: <<SN>> Model: <<Model>> P/N: <<PN>> Subsequent label cells should have something like: <<Next Record>>User: <<USER>> UIN: <<UIN>> Country: <<COUNTRY>> S/N: <<SN>> Model: <<Model>> P/N: <<PN>> Peter Jamieson >> Can you spell this out a bit? I read and re-read, but wasn't sure what >> exactly you are seeing. Is the extra row at the very end of the output, [quoted text clipped - 94 lines] >>>>> Stuck and hoping someone here knows a good solution to this. Thanks! >>>>> :oD >> So here's the problem. 5167 has 4 columns of 20 rows (for a total of 80 >> labels). The original target label file has the standard 8x20. But the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > that at some point along the way, you may have selected a table row and > duplicated it by accident to make a 4x21 layout. I start out with an 4x20 doct. as well. I put a typo there, btw, the end result comes out 4x21, not 8x21! So my main word doct. (yes, or "template", I never have kept the terms straight, Word or not), starts out as 4x20 but the merged doct. comes out 4x21 each time. I've re-created the template 3 times now and not once did I duplicate a table row, so don't know why this additional row is sneaking in <g>. > To see what's happening, it may help to show the table gridlines - try > Table|Gridlines. Always have the table gridlines showing, btw. Thanks. >> User: <<USER>> >> UIN: <<UIN>> >> Country: <<COUNTRY>> S/N: <<SN>> >> Model: <<Model>> P/N: <<PN>><<Next Record>> Okay, Word is opposite in that way. The <<Next Record>> appears at the top of the 2nd record onwards rather than at the end of the first record onwards, except for the last record. Got it. > Some Word-oriented terminology: > a. Mail Merge Main Document: the layout (or "template", but that does not [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > c. Mail Merge Destination - could be a Destination Document or a > Destination Printer, etc. Yeah-yeah <lol>. I've never kept the terms straight. I just know myself what I'm working with even after all these years of doing other work besides word-processing <g>. It's like riding a bike, though, it all comes back to one even if the app is a different one. > In the Mail Merge Main Document, the first label cell should have: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Country: <<COUNTRY>> S/N: <<SN>> > Model: <<Model>> P/N: <<PN>> Changed it to this format where the <<Next Record>> is at beginning starting with cell #2 onwards. Nothing has changed, though. The labels are still coming out okay, same as before, and all in the right sequence, I'm just getting in an extra table row at the bottom of each page of the merged doct. (there are a total of 4 pages, so 3 of them are 4x21 while last page is only partially filled as it doesn't fill up an entire page). I'm stumped ... how 'bout you? Cheers. :oD > Peter Jamieson > [quoted text clipped - 98 lines] >>>>>> Stuck and hoping someone here knows a good solution to this. Thanks! >>>>>> :oD Has your Mail Merge Main Document definitely just got a 4x20 table? If you look beyond page 1 of that document, are there definitely no additional rows? Peter Jamieson >>> So here's the problem. 5167 has 4 columns of 20 rows (for a total of 80 >>> labels). The original target label file has the standard 8x20. But the [quoted text clipped - 167 lines] >>>>>>> Stuck and hoping someone here knows a good solution to this. >>>>>>> Thanks! :oD > Has your Mail Merge Main Document definitely just got a 4x20 table? Yes. > If you look beyond page 1 of that document, are there definitely no > additional rows? Yes. Just the one page. I always view in print layout mode so easy to see when there's more than one page. And it's only been one page since the beginning. Weird. > Peter Jamieson > [quoted text clipped - 169 lines] >>>>>>>> Stuck and hoping someone here knows a good solution to this. >>>>>>>> Thanks! :oD Weird indeed. So if for example your data source has 84 records and you output to a new document, what do you see? Does unchecking Tools|Options|Print|"Allow A4/Letter paper resizing" make any difference? Peter Jamieson >> Has your Mail Merge Main Document definitely just got a 4x20 table? > [quoted text clipped - 183 lines] >>>>>>>>> Stuck and hoping someone here knows a good solution to this. >>>>>>>>> Thanks! :oD > Weird indeed. > > So if for example your data source has 84 records and you output to a new > document, what do you see? <pulling hair out> I should have printed the sheets out before typing the # of sheets I actually had. Despite this other goof-up, the rest of the problem is as described. Okay, with an actual printout in hand, I'm getting only 2 sheets of paper, not 4 (thank goodness). I actually have 123 rows in the Excel doct. so less the header row, the 123 rows means that there should be 122 labels filled out in the final merge doct. I'm getting only 120. The label info is almost identical from cell to cell, only the serial number changes. But they're not completely sequential so I'll have to print out the Excel doct. tomorrow and verify where the missing 2 pieces of information are located (how much do you want to bet that one s/b at the end of page 1 and the other at the beginning of pg. 2, or something like it???!!). The first sheet has 4x21 labels showing up on it, the 2 has 4x9 filled in plus 2 extra cells, while another 38 cells just contain the "titles" of the fields and are, therefore, "blank" cells. .......... wait a minute ... just noticed something ... I'll be danged. The last table row at the bottom of the first page is actually the first table row of a second table that should actually start on page 2. I had not seen the square with the NSEW points before signalling the start of a table because the mouse pointer must be in a certain spot over a table, as we all know, and I hadn't mouse over any area in the table that would show this before until now. I just inserted a page break between the two "tables" and everything was fine. So, what does this mean? Am I missing a break of some sort at the bottom of my original Word template? Could it be something as simple as that?? Cheers. :oD > Does unchecking Tools|Options|Print|"Allow A4/Letter paper resizing" make > any difference? [quoted text clipped - 190 lines] >>>>>>>>>> Stuck and hoping someone here knows a good solution to this. >>>>>>>>>> Thanks! :oD >>"StargateFanFromWork" <NoSpam@NoJunk.com> wrote in message >>news:uR%23SXVPkHHA.4032@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... [snip] > wait a minute ... just noticed something ... I'll be danged. The last > table row at the bottom of the first page is actually the first table row [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > So, what does this mean? Am I missing a break of some sort at the bottom > of my original Word template? Could it be something as simple as that?? [snip] I played around with this and ended up inserting a section break right underneath the end of the table on the page of my original Word template. That seemed to do the trick. Is this acceptable Word usage for this type of thing? I'm asking because sometimes what we stumble upon doing is the best way to do something and it might cause problems down the road in other situations. Again, this seemed to do the trick. I'll test tomorrow by adding pages of dummy info to the Excel file to get several sheets in the merge and I'll see what happens then. Thanks. :oD Another thing to check - if you bring up the Mail Merge Helper, does it still say you are doing a label merge? If it had somehow changed to being a Catalog merge, then it probably wouldn't do a page break after it had merged each page. If there was space for a complete table row at the bottom of the page, it would probably be added to the existing table. Adding a section break might change that behaviour. However, that's a bit far-fetched. In any case, I don't really see how MailMerge can be cramming 21 rows onto one page if they are the correct height to match your label stationery, which suggests that there's still something wrong in the layout department. Peter Jamieson >>>"StargateFanFromWork" <NoSpam@NoJunk.com> wrote in message >>>news:uR%23SXVPkHHA.4032@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Thanks. :oD If the mail merge main document is changed to a catalog or directory type mailmerge document, another row of labels will be added at the bottom of the sheet. There is however only one table in the document, so the NSEW points would not appear. If the mail merge main document is changed to a letter type mailmerge main document, and the Next Page Section Break that normally separates the pages, somehow got changed to a Continuous Section break, then another row of labels will be added to the bottom of the sheet and in this instance, that row of labels is in a second table in the document so the NSEW points will appear. SignatureHope this helps. Please reply to the newsgroup unless you wish to avail yourself of my services on a paid consulting basis. Doug Robbins - Word MVP > Another thing to check - if you bring up the Mail Merge Helper, does it > still say you are doing a label merge? If it had somehow changed to being [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] >> >> Thanks. :oD > If the mail merge main document is changed to a catalog or directory type > mailmerge document, another row of labels will be added at the bottom of > the sheet. There is however only one table in the document, so the NSEW > points would not appear. No everything is fine re the type of doct. Helper clearly still states "Merge type: Mailing Labels". But I'm just ready to tear my hair out again, all the trials I did yesterday didn't put a section break in and the second page's table of labels started on the previous page so that after the 4x20 labels, an extra row would appear so that it looked like I was getting 4x21 labels per page until the last page. I added the extra "Section Break (Continuous)" and that fixed it yesterday. Now this morning, however, using the same docts., I'm getting a merged doct that shows a "Section Break (Continuous)" _and_ a "Section Break (Next Page)". Talk about going round the bend! Word is going to drive me nuts. At any rate, the 2 codes fit on the bottom of each pg (pg. 2, the last page, has 2 "continuous" ones rather than one "continuous" and one "next page" section break code, btw) and no blank pages are generated so I'm just going to leave the section break code I put into the template as it absolutely did not work without it yesterday. Even though there are no blank pages coming out with this test and sometime in future, who knows but that they might get an extra blank page in between each label sheet, I think that that's an easier error for the average user to deal with than getting a result that needs a page break to be put in the exact spot to separate the tables to get the correct 4x20 labels on each page. > If the mail merge main document is changed to a letter type mailmerge main > document, and the Next Page Section Break that normally separates the > pages, somehow got changed to a Continuous Section break, then another row > of labels will be added to the bottom of the sheet and in this instance, > that row of labels is in a second table in the document so the NSEW points > will appear. Makes sense except. This didn't happen, though. The same doct. I tried out again today was a label doct yet without having put in the added section break, no page break was added yesterday. Yet this morning it did work even without it. I'm at a loss to figure out why it worked differently today, but must admit that Word never ceases to play little tricks like this with me <g>. Anyway, I now have a working doct. that my guys can use for adding info to each unit they're repairing so that's what counts. Thanks. Really appreciate all the help. :oD >> Another thing to check - if you bring up the Mail Merge Helper, does it >> still say you are doing a label merge? If it had somehow changed to being [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] >>> >>> Thanks. :oD Just one thing I'd like to check - your Mail Merge Main document does only have one page? Peter Jamieson >> If the mail merge main document is changed to a catalog or directory type >> mailmerge document, another row of labels will be added at the bottom of [quoted text clipped - 91 lines] >>>> >>>> Thanks. :oD > Just one thing I'd like to check - your Mail Merge Main document does only > have one page? [snip] Yes. It's always been just the one page. Go figure ... OK, I had another look at this and get the 21 rows you describe. This is definitely an error in Word 2000's layout algorithm as you only have to reveal the paragraph marks etc. to see that there is an unconditional new page break under row 20. However, when you hide paragraph marks or print preview, it's definitely 21 rows per page. However, going into File|Page Setup does show a likely cause which is that the bottom margin is set to 0. If I change it to 36pt (0.4 or 0.5in would probably do) the problem goes away. I suspect this uncertainty about where to place row 21 is responsible for the jittery display as well. Peter Jamieson >> Just one thing I'd like to check - your Mail Merge Main document does >> only have one page? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Go figure ... > OK, I had another look at this and get the 21 rows you describe. This is > definitely an error in Word 2000's layout algorithm as you only have to [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > I suspect this uncertainty about where to place row 21 is responsible for > the jittery display as well. Interesting. I wasn't able to get bottom margins to work at either .5, .4, .3 or .2 inches, and Word insisted on putting .1 to .17 but this is good to know. If I ever run into this type of problem again with merges, this thread in the archives will definitely help as there's an arsenal of things to try in order to get the merges to work properly. Thank you! After lunch, I also much check to see to see if I'm still missing a couple of labels. I've printed out the documents and will compare both then. Thank goodness there are only 122 records to check through <g>. Cheers. :oD > Peter Jamieson > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> >> Go figure ... [snip] > Changed it to this format where the <<Next Record>> is at beginning > starting with cell #2 onwards. Nothing has changed, though. The labels > are still coming out okay, same as before, and all in the right sequence, > I'm just getting in an extra table row at the bottom of each page of the > merged doct. (there are a total of 4 pages, so 3 of them are 4x21 while > last page is only partially filled as it doesn't fill up an entire page). [snip] One clue. Something else weird is happening. In latest test, I tried both options where we can choose _not_ to print blank lines or not but no matter which option I choose, I get the same results: about 40 extra filled-in cells in the last half of the 4th page where just the field "titles" show up. In other words, the merge is creating a few "blank" cells in the final merge document. I went back to the Excel data source file and though I knew I'd defined the print area correctly this morning, went back and set the print area again. There are absolutely no rows in the data source file that are completely blank. Yes, there are a couple of blanks in the rows but nothing to account for 40 empty records showing only titles. Yes, there are also 2 entire blank columns in the Excel file, but these correspond to fields that weren't defined in the Word template. Also, besides having these empty cells, this last page has 4x19 labels showing vs. the 4x20. Not sure if any of this is significant, but don't recall seeing either of these 2 things happen before in other merges I've done. Again, it's been so long I could be wrong, but thought I'd point these 2 things out. Cheers and have a good evening. Finishing my day and off to do some grocery shopping <g>. :oD Check that in the File>Print dialog, the Scale to paper size option is set to "No scaling" SignatureHope this helps. Please reply to the newsgroup unless you wish to avail yourself of my services on a paid consulting basis. Doug Robbins - Word MVP >> Can you spell this out a bit? I read and re-read, but wasn't sure what >> exactly you are seeing. Is the extra row at the very end of the output, [quoted text clipped - 94 lines] >>>>> Stuck and hoping someone here knows a good solution to this. Thanks! >>>>> :oD As far as I can tell, when you adjust the cell margin, Word actually modifies the cell size (or at least, the height - I haven't even considered the width). It wouldn't surprise me to learn that this is a well-known "feature". I had to switch to using points as my measurement unit to see the changes with any precision, but with this label layout, before changing the cell margins, the first line of text in the first row was at 36pt according to the display in the status bar, and and the first line of the second row was at 72pt. After changing the cell margins to 0.05in, the equivalent values were 39.6pt and 79pt, and the cells were pushed over to the next page. Selecting the table and changing the row height to 32.4pt to compensate was enought to get all the labels back on one page, but whether it's what you need is another question. Peter Jamieson >I absolutely must have cell margins that are at about 0.05" around the >insides of Avery-sized labels #5167. Before changing the margins, the [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > Stuck and hoping someone here knows a good solution to this. Thanks! :oD > As far as I can tell, when you adjust the cell margin, Word actually > modifies the cell size (or at least, the height - I haven't even [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Peter Jamieson Interesting, thank you! I"ll definitely take a look at this. Doug's recommendation involving changing spacing to the left and right of, and before and after paragraphs _seems_ to be working so far. Though this not something one would intuitively think of as as a solution (who would ever think of a cell in terms of a paragraph?), I'm just glad that something works. But I'll check into your solution above. I always learn something new when I try out a new technique. Thanks. :oD >>I absolutely must have cell margins that are at about 0.05" around the >>insides of Avery-sized labels #5167. Before changing the margins, the [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >> Stuck and hoping someone here knows a good solution to this. Thanks! >> :oD IMO if it works, stick with it. Something I noticed when experimenting with this was that the Word display was quite unstable when I modified the cell margins - i.e. it seemed to be updating continually. That could be just a problem with the display drivers, especially I as use a virtual machine to go back to the older versions of Word,, but it could also be a sign that the feature (or its implementation) requires a lot of processing. Peter Jamieson >> As far as I can tell, when you adjust the cell margin, Word actually >> modifies the cell size (or at least, the height - I haven't even [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] >>> Stuck and hoping someone here knows a good solution to this. Thanks! >>> :oD > IMO if it works, stick with it. True <lol>. But it's good to have a reserve solution for when the first one ends up not working at some point. I experimented with the paragraph spacing, btw, in a new Word table doct. I happened to be creating and the paragraph spacing didn't work there (case in point). Fortunately, cell margin editing could be done in that case since it was not a merge doct. with a small tricky label, etc. Anyway, it's always good to have more than one way of doing something. > Something I noticed when experimenting with this was that the Word display > was quite unstable when I modified the cell margins - i.e. it seemed to be > updating continually. That could be just a problem with the display > drivers, especially I as use a virtual machine to go back to the older > versions of Word,, but it could also be a sign that the feature (or its > implementation) requires a lot of processing. That's what that slight flickering must have been ... ! I couldn't figure out what that was though it was so slight that I thought it might be my system having too much to process at once besides Word. Anyway, thanks. Close to fixing this, there's just the issue of the extra row (as per the other message in this thread). Cheers. :oD > Peter Jamieson >>> As far as I can tell, when you adjust the cell margin, Word actually [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] >>>> Stuck and hoping someone here knows a good solution to this. Thanks! >>>> :oD > True <lol>. But it's good to have a reserve solution for when the first > one ends up not working at some point. I agree. Typically it depends on whether you're doing a one-off (you just need to get it done) or are trying to get your infrastructure right for multiple-easy-to-use repeats. Peter Jamieson >> IMO if it works, stick with it. > [quoted text clipped - 78 lines] >>>>> Stuck and hoping someone here knows a good solution to this. Thanks! >>>>> :oD
|
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.