MS Office Forum / Word / Numbering / May 2007
LISTNUM with multiple lists in Word 2003
|
|
Thread rating:  |
jj - 18 Apr 2007 16:34 GMT I am having issues using multiple lists with the LISTNUM field in Word 2003. I have broken the issue down to a simple replicatable case. I insert 2 LISTNUM fields, each on a different line. I then name the first list "Test" and the second list "Test2". At this point the fields are "1)" and "2)". I then change the format of the the second one using the "Bullets and Numbering" dialog (for example, to the "Chapter 1" format in the bottom right corner of the "Outline Numbered" tab. The document now shows the first field as "Chapter 0" and the second field as "Chapter 1" instead of "1)" and "Chapter 1" as expected. If I undo and then redo at this point, however, it shows up correctly. Am I doing something wrong, or is this a bug with Word? And if this is a Word bug, is there a workaround.
John McGhie [MVP Word, Word Mac] - 19 Apr 2007 04:49 GMT Yes, it IS a bug in Word, or rather, it's a bug in the help.
The Help for a ListNum field gives the impression that you can assign your own names to ListNum field series.
You can't.
The name indicates only the type of structure a List has: the name must be one of the built-in names.
If you do not assign a name, the name "NumberDefault" is assumed.
You CAN create a numbering style using Outline Numbering. You can associate the nine levels of that number scheme (a "List Template") to a set of nine styles (preferrably, use the Heading 1 through Heading 9 series: it's simpler).
You can then assign a "Name" to that list template. If you do, you can then connect ListNum fields to that list template by specifying the same name as the ListNum field list name.
It still won't do what you want: give you two independently numbering sets of fields in the document.
For that, you need to use SEQ fields.
Hope this helps
 Signature Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.
http://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
John McGhie, Consultant Technical Writer McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltd Sydney, Australia. GMT + 10 Hrs +61 4 1209 1410, mailto:john@mcghie.name
>I am having issues using multiple lists with the LISTNUM field in Word > 2003. I have broken the issue down to a simple replicatable case. I [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > correctly. Am I doing something wrong, or is this a bug with Word? > And if this is a Word bug, is there a workaround. jj - 19 Apr 2007 15:33 GMT Hmmm, it does seem to let me create separate lists though. If I add 3 LISTNUM fields and name them so that my doc looks like
{ LISTNUM test1 } { LISTNUM test2 } { LISTNUM test3 }
and then use the "bullets and numbering" dialog to give each of them a style with a name I get the aforementioned bug. If I then erase the fields from the document and insert the folowing into the doc
{ LISTNUM test1 } { LISTNUM test2 } { LISTNUM test3 } { LISTNUM test3 } { LISTNUM test2 } { LISTNUM test1 }
The document looks like this
Article I. Chapter 1 1) 2) Chapter 2 Article II.
I would expect that if they were the same list it would instead look like
Article I. Chapter 2 3) 4) Chapter 5 Article VI.
It does appear that you can create multiple lists, but if you name a list and don't select a style from the "Bullets and Numbering" tab, it treats that LISTNUM field as if it were named "NumberDefault".
I got around this bug by changing the order in which I perform the actions to generate the document.
Also, is there a way to create the list name as the "bullets and numbering" dialog does, without actually inserting a number in the document. The reason for this is that I am trying to automate a document, and I would like for the user to set up the list style, then I can just pop the LISTNUM fields into the doc. They can use the dialog, but it inserts a number at the current line, which they must then delete. This works, but it is a bit kludgey. It would be much nicer and cleaner if there were a way to configure the LISTNUM numbering style without actually inserting an item.
Thanks for your help,
jj
On Apr 18, 11:49 pm, "John McGhie [MVP Word, Word Mac]" <j...@mcghie.name> wrote:
> Yes, it IS a bug in Word, or rather, it's a bug in the help. > [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > > correctly. Am I doing something wrong, or is this a bug with Word? > > And if this is a Word bug, is there a workaround. John McGhie [MVP Word, Word Mac] - 21 Apr 2007 07:16 GMT Hi:
In my third sentence I said "You can't do this". Sorry: That's the current state of play.
You CANNOT create extra "lists" for the ListNum field. There are only three lists, and they control the formatting. Any name you specify other than the default names will be ignored.
I swear this is a bug: and I have looked for years for a work-around, but it's not there. You can't do it that way.
Use SEQ fields: this scenario is one of the reasons they are still with us
:-) Cheers
 Signature Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.
http://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
John McGhie, Consultant Technical Writer McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltd Sydney, Australia. GMT + 10 Hrs +61 4 1209 1410, mailto:john@mcghie.name
> Hmmm, it does seem to let me create separate lists though. If I add > 3 LISTNUM fields and name them so that my doc looks like [quoted text clipped - 114 lines] >> > correctly. Am I doing something wrong, or is this a bug with Word? >> > And if this is a Word bug, is there a workaround. jj - 01 May 2007 00:44 GMT Hi:
In my first sentence I said "It does seem to let me create separate lists though." Sorry: It seems to work for me almost as the help file states. The only additional requirement seems to be that I actually set the style for each list in the Bullets & Numbering dialog.
I have a document with listnum fields that are in separate lists, without manually setting numbering restarts. I can intermix as many lists as I want, putting the lists one after the other, or completely intermixing the fields. Once I have done this everything works excellently. Numbering is distinct to each list. I can send you a document as an example if you don't believe me. The only issue I have is that when I set a numbering style for a given listnum field through the B & N dialog, the numbers in the fields above it go to 0's. An undo/redo will fix this, as will saving the document and reopening. I was just asking if there was a workaround for having to undo/redo or save/reopen the doc.
SEQ fields will not work for me as I need to do outline style lists with numbers such as 1.1, 1.2, or (1)(a), (1)(b), etc. and it does not appear that I can do this with SEQ fields.
:-( Not so cheery
On Apr 21, 2:16 am, "John McGhie [MVP Word, Word Mac]" <j...@mcghie.name> wrote:
> Hi: > [quoted text clipped - 146 lines] > >> > correctly. Am I doing something wrong, or is this a bug with Word? > >> > And if this is a Word bug, is there a workaround. Peter Jamieson - 02 May 2007 07:39 GMT > SEQ fields will not work for me as I need to do outline style lists > with numbers such as 1.1, 1.2, or (1)(a), (1)(b), etc. and it does not > appear that I can do this with SEQ fields. I can't comment on the LISTNUM stuff but the way you use SEQ fields to achieve multi-level numbering such as 1.1, 1.2, 1.2.1 etc. is, for example.
reset { SEQ level1 \r0 \h } 1: { SEQ level3 \r0 \h }{ SEQ level2 \r0 \h }{ SEQ level1 } 1.1: { SEQ level3 \r0 \h }{ SEQ level1 \c }.{ SEQ level2 } 1.2: { SEQ level3 \r0 \h }{ SEQ level1 \c }.{ SEQ level2 } 1.2.1: { SEQ level1 \c }.{ SEQ level2 \c }.{ SEQ level3 } 1.2.2: { SEQ level1 \c }.{ SEQ level2 \c }.{ SEQ level3 } 2: { SEQ level3 \r0 \h }{ SEQ level2 \r0 \h }{ SEQ level1 }
and so on - in other words, the set of field codes used at each level is always the same. You can cut out some of the \r0 stuff if there is a strict hierarchy (e.g. you never have a situation where you have 1.2.1 and no 1.2). You can do alphanumerics and punctuation using other switches such as the numeric format switch \#, \*alphabetic and so on, and/or plain text.
The main problem is that you can't easily prevent a user from breaking the structure, but that's not much different from any other facility in Word.
Peter Jamieson
> Hi: > [quoted text clipped - 187 lines] >> >> > correctly. Am I doing something wrong, or is this a bug with Word? >> >> > And if this is a Word bug, is there a workaround.
|
|
|