 |
 | 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 / Numbering / November 2004TOC conflict with 2000/2002
A file done in 2000 (9.0.2720) and opened in 2002 (10.2627.2625) displays the TOC without the paragraph numbers. As a hint, the same file, returned to the puter running 2000, does not display the numbers either but will do so on refresh. The 2002 puter will not display them even after refresh. The TOC instruction is: { TOC \n 1-2 \h \z \t "TOC Placeholder,4,Heading 2,2,EPHEADING - Level One,1,EHPEADING - Level One Text,2" b\W} I presume one of these placeholders has a changed meaning in 2002 but have not been able to tell which one it is. Would appreciate help on this. Thanks. The TOC can only pick up the information from the styles used to build it. Is the template that's attached to your problem document present on both machines? Do you have "automatically update document styles" set on Tools > Templates and add ins? If so, try unchecking this on the Word 2000 PC and saving the file before opening it on your XP machine. Genine (There used to be an article on the MSKB saying that using the automatically update document styles could give unpredictable results on Outline numbered styles in Word2000 and above - seems to have been moved though.) > A file done in 2000 (9.0.2720) and opened in 2002 (10.2627.2625) > displays the TOC without the paragraph numbers. As a hint, the same [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Would appreciate help on this. Thanks. > The TOC can only pick up the information from the styles used to build it. Is > the template that's attached to your problem document present on both [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >> >>Would appreciate help on this. Thanks. The templates are identical. The automatically update option is not checked. Has to be one of the switches meaning something different in 2002, doesn't it? Not necessarily. I would go back to your W2000 pc and update the outline styles in the document so that the document numbering displays correctly at all times. Once you know there is nothing wrong with your file in Word 2000 format you have a better basis for troubleshooting the difference between the two systems. > > The TOC can only pick up the information from the styles used to build it. Is > > the template that's attached to your problem document present on both [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > checked. Has to be one of the switches meaning something different in > 2002, doesn't it? By the way, the field code looks wrong - surely it should be /o not /n? Genine > Not necessarily. I would go back to your W2000 pc and update the outline > styles in the document so that the document numbering displays correctly at [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > checked. Has to be one of the switches meaning something different in > > 2002, doesn't it? There's an article about field switches in TOCs on the MVP FAQ site that might help. http://www.word.mvps.org/FAQs/Formatting/TOCSwitches.htm Genine > By the way, the field code looks wrong - surely it should be /o not /n? > Genine [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > > > checked. Has to be one of the switches meaning something different in > > > 2002, doesn't it? > Not necessarily. I would go back to your W2000 pc and update the outline > styles in the document so that the document numbering displays correctly at > all times. I guess I haven't been clear. The document has always displayed correctly at all times in 2000. It displays incorrectly at all times in 2002. The \n switch means no numbers, but it usually means no page numbers. \o is used to determine outline levels used for the TOC Does your field contain the correct switches? Genine > A file done in 2000 (9.0.2720) and opened in 2002 (10.2627.2625) > displays the TOC without the paragraph numbers. As a hint, the same [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Would appreciate help on this. Thanks. |
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.