 |
 | 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 / Programming / July 2004Help: Cross-Version Word Object Library problems (9.0, 10,0, 11.0)
I'm working in-house on an Access application to which I've recently added automatic fill-out-the-form functionality. The problem: I'm in a mixed version environment in regards to Office - some machines are at Word 9.0 Object Lib, two at Object Lib Word 10.0 and the boss and myself at Object Lib 11.0. I put the Word 9.0 object library on my machine (which has Office 2003 installed) and linked to that; that works fine application-wise - I'm not doing anything close to needing more Word functionality than that provides - but as best I can tell whenever I save my version the Reference reverts back to Word Object 11.0, so everytime I send out a new release, which may be a couple of times a day for misc odds-and-ends fixes, most of the machines in the office choke, requiring manual intervention on my part to reset the Reference to whatever they have on their machine. Is there either 1) Ideal solution I don't expect: A meta-object reference that will happily use whatever Word object library is present on the current machine or 2) a way to force the application to stick to a given Object Library? I'm going to have the same issue soon with the Outlook lib. Any help greatly appreciated. TIA Mark Loveless Reluctant Access Programmer mark.loveless@pmilends.com The basic technique is: 1. Develop your application for the lowest common denominator (ie Word 9, as you are doing), and 2. Use late binding. During development add the Word library as a project reference and declare it using something like Dim WordApp as Word.Application Set WordApp = new Word.Application Then before distribution, remove the Word library reference and change the declaration to Dim WordApp as Object Set WordApp = GetObject("Word.Application") You can use late binding during development if you wish; but you get no intellisense help or syntax checking on the Word object. > I'm working in-house on an Access application to which I've recently > added automatic fill-out-the-form functionality. The problem: I'm in [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > Reluctant Access Programmer > mark.loveless@pmilends.com If you develop using the earliest version of Word, then you should use early, not late, binding.  Signaturehttp://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site. > The basic technique is: > [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > > Reluctant Access Programmer > > mark.loveless@pmilends.com Howard, perhaps you didn't read the original post. The OP's problem is precisely that early binding isn't appropriate in this case. Unless you're suggesting that the OP install the Word 9 library on all machines? Code developed for Word 9 is upward compatible, so by using late binding the app will function happily with those users who have later versions. > If you develop using the earliest version of Word, then you should use > early, not late, binding. [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] > > > Reluctant Access Programmer > > > mark.loveless@pmilends.com You only need Word 97 (which is Word 8, not Word 9) on the development system. When you compile with Word 97, later versions of Word will automatically use the correct library, so early binding should be used. For example, see the following which was compiled using Word 97. http://www.standards.com/OhMyWord/SetReferenceInWordProject.html Signaturehttp://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site. > Howard, perhaps you didn't read the original post. The OP's problem is > precisely that early binding isn't appropriate in this case. Unless you're [quoted text clipped - 63 lines] > > > > Reluctant Access Programmer > > > > mark.loveless@pmilends.com We must be thinking of different things. If you add Word.9 as a reference to your project and create an early-bound object, it will fail if the user has (eg) Word.10. Late binding avoid this problem. > You only need Word 97 (which is Word 8, not Word 9) on the development > system. [quoted text clipped - 78 lines] > > > > > Reluctant Access Programmer > > > > > mark.loveless@pmilends.com If you use version N as a reference, the code will work with any later version. I do this often. Signaturehttp://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site. > We must be thinking of different things. If you add Word.9 as a reference to > your project and create an early-bound object, it will fail if the user has [quoted text clipped - 94 lines] > > > > > > Reluctant Access Programmer > > > > > > mark.loveless@pmilends.com Well done! You've caught the drift. > If you use version N as a reference, the code will work with any later > version. [quoted text clipped - 108 lines] > > > > > > > Reluctant Access Programmer > > > > > > > mark.loveless@pmilends.com Yes, but I'm talking about early, not late binding. Signaturehttp://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site. > Well done! You've caught the drift. > [quoted text clipped - 118 lines] > > > > > > > > Reluctant Access Programmer > > > > > > > > mark.loveless@pmilends.com Thanks. I had been working at it backwards, thinking I would have to read the registry to get the explicit class and create that, when it hit me that the CreateObject wasn't be flagged as an error (and was in fact already doing what I was thinking I had to do manually , i.e. reading the class from the registry to find the appropriate DLL) but the object declaration, just as you note. I tried it as with appWord declared as Object rather than Word.Application, and once I cleaned up the constants (e.g. wdDoNotSaveChanges), it compiled OK. After reading your comments I see I'm on the right track now, and will use method 2 - develop with the explicit declaration and distribute without. As I expected, just cluelessness on my part. Thanks much. > The basic technique is: > [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > > Reluctant Access Programmer > > mark.loveless@pmilends.com |
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.