 |
 | 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 / August 2007Editing Recipients in Word 2007 Mail Merge
We just updated our Office from 2000 to 2007 and are having trouble with our mail merges. Is it possible to open the main merge document and from there open and edit the data source? The data sources are Word tables and we are sort of able to get to the tables by highlighting the data source and clicking on edit, but View Source is grayed out and even if we change the receipient information in the Mail Merge Recipients dialog box it won't let us save the changes. It askes if we want to save them and then tells us they are read only. View source always worked well before and it is pretty necessary since some of our fields are multiple lines (i.e. address, city, state and zip in one field). Broadly speaking, if you were connecting using the default method (DDE) in Word 2000, Access would be open and you could use it to edit the data source. That may be the best way to do the same thing in Word 2007 (At present I cannot check). To make the DDE connection you need to check Word Office Button->Word Options->Advanced->General->"Confirm file format conversion on open", go through the process of connecting to your data source again, and choose the DDE option when it is offered. I'm not sure you can edit from the Edit Recipients box in this case, unless the Access database is an "Office Address List", which is in essence a .mdb created in Word 2002/2003 mailmerge that has a specific table and query structure. > We just updated our Office from 2000 to 2007 and are having trouble with > our [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > necessary since some of our fields are multiple lines (i.e. address, city, > state and zip in one field). If your data source is a Word table and you have the data source attached to your merge document (with an old merge doc it will probably be worth re-attaching the data source, for as Peter says Word 2007 uses a different default method of connecting to its data from Word 2000), click the Mailings Tab, then Edit Recipient List. This will open a dialog box with the records in the top section and at the bottom there is a section labelled Data Source with a window showing the path of the attached data source. Select that and the Edit button below it becomes available. You can add addresses using the Add Tool. When you have completed your merge and close out of the merge document Word prompts you to save your data doc. This it will then save should you agree?  Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>><<> Graham Mayor - Word MVP My web site www.gmayor.com Word MVP web site http://word.mvps.org <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>><<> > We just updated our Office from 2000 to 2007 and are having trouble > with our mail merges. Is it possible to open the main merge document [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > necessary since some of our fields are multiple lines (i.e. address, > city, state and zip in one field). Hi Graham, Incidentally I have now managed to check with an Access .mdb and the process should be the same or extremely similar for simple tables, which is an improvement on Word 2003 where AFAIK only OALs are editable from within Word. There may well be limitations if the data source is a linked table, or a query (for one thing, not all queries are logically editable anyway). FWIW there are some limitaitons when you edit some types of data source in Word 2007 - if the data source is on a network drive, you can go through all the editing steps you describe then find that Word fails to save the edits (in fact the messages suggest that it is trying to save a temp file, not the actual data source. This has been reported to Microsoft but of course I do not know whether and when the problem will be fixed. SignaturePeter Jamieson http://tips.pjmsn.me.uk > If your data source is a Word table and you have the data source attached > to your merge document (with an old merge doc it will probably be worth [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >> necessary since some of our fields are multiple lines (i.e. address, >> city, state and zip in one field). There have been a few reports in the Word forums about problems with saving Word documents across networks. My comments referred to only what I tested here on a stand-alone system - and of course the data source was quoted as a Word table which does tend to make things easier :) I agree the mail merge handling is rather better in 2007 than it was in 2003, but there are oddities that can catch you out, such as the merge to labels automatic adding of line spacing if you follow the logicval merge process, but not if you start from a template and attach the data source before changing the document type to labels. Even the dreaded addressblock field works rather better now. Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>><<> Graham Mayor - Word MVP My web site www.gmayor.com Word MVP web site http://word.mvps.org <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>><<> > Hi Graham, > [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] >>> it is pretty necessary since some of our fields are multiple lines >>> (i.e. address, city, state and zip in one field). << and of course the data source was quoted as a > Word table which does tend to make things easier :) Whoops! I've been labouring under the mistaken assumption that it was an Access table. > There have been a few reports in the Word forums about problems with > saving Word documents across networks. Yes, there is definitely a problem there, unless it has been fixed in an update since about 2 months ago. > I agree the mail merge handling is rather better in 2007 than it was in > 2003, but there are oddities that can catch you out, such as the merge to > labels automatic adding of line spacing if you follow the logicval merge > process, but not if you start from a template and attach the data source > before changing the document type to labels. Even the dreaded addressblock > field works rather better now. There certaily seems to be quite a mix. I get the impression they might have planned to do a lot more with the "content controls" but couldn't get it all into this release, but maybe they have now decided that anything beyond a basic merge is going to require programming. SignaturePeter Jamieson http://tips.pjmsn.me.uk > There have been a few reports in the Word forums about problems with > saving Word documents across networks. My comments referred to only what I [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] >>>> it is pretty necessary since some of our fields are multiple lines >>>> (i.e. address, city, state and zip in one field). Thank you both for your information. If I understand correctly, there is no good way to edit the recipients in the data source as long as they data source is a Word table. I tried creating a new recipient list letting Word decide how to do it. I kept the list on the server and was able to get into it by clicking on Edit Recipient List, choosing file name under Data Source and clicking Edit. It was a pain though - deleting a bunch of field names I didn't want and creating new ones. On a whim, I tried copying the Word table into Excel and attaching the Excel document as the data source. It worked. I was able to get to and edit the records from the main mail merge document and actually save the changes. Of course, I still can't open the actual data source document so I can't enter multi-line fields, but I guess it's closer to what we had before. Now we're having trouble with the merges that connect to Access. The Word documents are acting like they can't find their Access data sources and when you try to connect them using the Select Recipients, not all of the tables and queries show up on the list. Frustrating. Do you think there's any chance Microsoft is going to make the mail merge easier to use? > << > and of course the data source was quoted as a [quoted text clipped - 78 lines] > >>>> it is pretty necessary since some of our fields are multiple lines > >>>> (i.e. address, city, state and zip in one field). If the data source is a Word table then what I said was that the in-built functions to edit the data source (adding and deleting records) works just fine. It is only with more complex data sources that you could have problems. Using multi-line fields was never a good plan. Use a field for each line. Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>><<> Graham Mayor - Word MVP My web site www.gmayor.com Word MVP web site http://word.mvps.org <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>><<> > Thank you both for your information. If I understand correctly, > there is no good way to edit the recipients in the data source as [quoted text clipped - 112 lines] >>>>>> fields are multiple lines (i.e. address, city, state and zip in >>>>>> one field). Adding and deleting records does work, but we still can't save the changes. Not being able to have two line fields is disappointing, but we can live with it. Do you know why the mail merge would not give us a complete list of all the tables and queries when we connect it to Access as the data source? > If the data source is a Word table then what I said was that the in-built > functions to edit the data source (adding and deleting records) works just [quoted text clipped - 118 lines] > >>>>>> fields are multiple lines (i.e. address, city, state and zip in > >>>>>> one field). > it. Do you know why the mail merge would not give us a complete list of > all > the tables and queries when we connect it to Access as the data source? By default, Word 2007 connects using OLE DB, which a. does not "see" certain query and table types (e.g. it does not see parameter queries, tables linked via ODBC, queries that use Access VBA user-defined functions, and queries that use the financial series functions) b. does not return any records if you connect to queries that use the old wildcard characters * and ?, which is a problem if you are using Access 2007 because the facility to get it to recognise the new ones % and _ is at best well hidden and AFAIK may not work at all. SignaturePeter Jamieson http://tips.pjmsn.me.uk > Adding and deleting records does work, but we still can't save the > changes. [quoted text clipped - 127 lines] >> >>>>>> fields are multiple lines (i.e. address, city, state and zip in >> >>>>>> one field).
|
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.