Creating index – why continuous sec. breaks? (Word 2000)

Topic

New Reply

When you put an index in a document, it seems logical to me that you want it separated from the rest of the document by Next Page section breaks. Why then does Word 2000 insert Continuous section breaks before and after an index it creates?

As if that weren’t bad enough, if you’ve then changed the Continuous SB’s to Next Page to organize your document the way you want, when you update the index field, Word puts the Continuous SB’s back in!

What is the logic in this and is there any way to prevent it?

Reply | Quote

Replies

An index can be in multiple columns. When you set multiple columns for part of a document, Word always places continuous section breaks before and after that part. I assume that the programmers decided to place continuous section breaks even if you specify the Index to be in one column in order to make it easier to change the number of columns later on. Moreover, if the index is at the end of the document, you wouldn’t want a next page section break after it, but a continuous section break doesn’t harm.
You can always insert a next page section break or a manual page break before the first and after the second continuous section break.

Reply | Quote

Sorry for the late reply, Hans. I couldn’t get to a computer before now!

In our firm, the main thing we use the index feature for is an “index of defined terms,” which is like a table of contents (one column, with a dot leader and page numbers), and thus needs a Next Page section break. I think the programmers were short-sighted by not taking that type of index into account and realizing that Continuous SB’s aren’t appropriate for all uses of the index feature.

By automatically inserting Continuous SB’s, the program forces you to put the index at the end of the document, which in the case of our “index of defined terms,” is not where it actually goes in our documents. Sure, you can adjust your page numbers to account for that and move the pages around once they print out, but it would be nice to have the choice to put it where it actually comes in order.

Also, it’s just plain annoying to have to change the type of section break every time you update the field. A one-column index is the equivalent of a table of contents, and the programmers should have realized that.

I appreciate your taking the time to answer.

Reply | Quote

I don’t understand why the continuous section breaks would force you to put the index at the end of the document. An index in the middle of the document is well possible. And if you put next page section breaks before the first and after the second continuous section break instead of modifying the continuous section breaks, Word will leave the next page section breaks alone when you update the index.

Reply | Quote

I shouldn’t have expressed it as “forced,” because that’s not really true, as you say. It just saves a bit of annoyance to put the index at the end of the document because that way you can just delete the closing Continuous SB and convert the preceding one to a Next Page instead of having to convert them both.

I’ve had bad experiences in converting section breaks from Continuous to Next Page in a few documents in the past. You convert a Continous SB to Next Page, and then you discover that the prior Next Page SB has been converted to a Continuous for no apparent reason. You fix that one, and then the one prior to that one gets converted and so on.

My goal in all of this is to get by with the least amount of annoyance.

Reply | Quote

Why not leave the automatic section breaks alone and either

• Include your own, additional, section breaks before and after the automatic ones
• Use a paragraph formatted with the page break before attribute immediately before and after the index (I use one with the word INDEX before).
  [/list]StuartR

Reply | Quote

Those are excellent ideas, Stuart. I would never have thought of the first one because I tend not to want to leave extra formatting around that isn’t doing anything. But it really doesn’t matter here. That second one is really creative.

Thanks for the ideas.

Reply | Quote