I got along quite happily with mail merge using Access queries under
Office 2000. Now I have (expensively) downgraded to Office 2003 and am
unable to connect to the data source queries, unable to find an
instructive description of the changes to mail merge or useful help
information and damn certain there'll be no refund for inferior
software. Is there a solution (not another workround !) or are they
loosing it even more/caring even less?
Graham Mayor - 13 Jan 2005 15:25 GMT
The default way Word connects to data has been changed, but the old method
remains - http://www.gmayor.com/mail_merge_labels_with_word_xp.htm should
put you back in touch with the familiar.

Signature
<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>><<>
Graham Mayor - Word MVP
My web site www.gmayor.com
Word MVP web site http://word.mvps.org
<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>><<>
> I got along quite happily with mail merge using Access queries under
> Office 2000. Now I have (expensively) downgraded to Office 2003 and am
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> software. Is there a solution (not another workround !) or are they
> loosing it even more/caring even less?
Doug Robbins - 14 Jan 2005 01:01 GMT
From the Tools menu, select Options and then go to the General tab and check
the box against the "Confirm conversions at open item." After doing that,
when you attach the data source, you will be asked which connection method
you want to use. The DDE option will probably be the one that you want.
To gain more control over the mail merge process, select Toolbars from the
View menu and check the Mailmerge item. Then use the mailmerge toolbar.

Signature
Please respond to the Newsgroup for the benefit of others who may be
interested. Questions sent directly to me will only be answered on a paid
consulting basis.
Hope this helps,
Doug Robbins - Word MVP
>I got along quite happily with mail merge using Access queries under
> Office 2000. Now I have (expensively) downgraded to Office 2003 and am
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> software. Is there a solution (not another workround !) or are they
> loosing it even more/caring even less?