Replies

The only time I had a look at how Word converts to html, I noticed that it creates a new folder in which it puts the graphics, then links to that folder. If you’re sending your page to a server, you need to send the new folder it created without telling you.

Yes, deleting the winword.exe did it. I was able to save normal.dot and a new document was just what I wanted. Thanks, Gary.

Thanks, Gary. Well, yes and no. There WAS an old temp file. But after I deleted it, I got the same results – normal.dot was read-only, it asked if I wanted to save changes to the global template but then said it was in use. And although yesterday I saw the changes when I started a new file, today they weren’t there.

In the task manager, I see Microsoft Word and Winword. Is that two versions of Word? Winword is still there when I have Word and Outlook closed. I’m such a chicken – are you saying I should close that?

Well, never mind, it seems to be done. I have prompt to save normal.dot set, so if it refused to save the changes because normal.dot was being used by another application (well, it wasn’t), so I had to cancel the save, then when did it save it? The file I was editing is in C:WINDOWSApplication DataMicrosoftTemplatesNormal.dot. It still shows a save date of Sept 21 in Explorer. Is it using the file I called normal2.dot?

I just used the ListRestart macro. I haven’t read any of the other posts – just found that, used it and it worked. Thanks, Andrew.

Gary, it’s even way more weird than you said. In document that was giving me so much trouble, I put a section break BEFORE the table and my friends received it, so I thought that was that. Then I saw what they received: row 6 of the table came first, as a separate table; then the rest of the table with the first 6 rows in a frame (I did NOT deliberately use a frame), then the section break, now positioned AFTER the table! Word wrapping was set to none (on both tables).

And have you see the routine where you either drag a row to a new position, or cut it and paste it, and all the rows scrunch up? Wait till you see that one! It’s very scary.

I wonder if it’s just worth saving documents with tables as Word 95 if they’re to be sent to people who don’t have Word 2000.

Thanks, Gary – I never saw that thing before you mentioned it. It seems a bit imprecise – most of the time it expanded the table to quite a bit less vertically than where I had my cursor when I clicked, but not always. You’re implying that it’s better not to know anyway, and I’m inclined to agree. I suspect it was really put in to help people use tables for page setup, the way people code web pages.

Gary, one of the settings I was talking about is under Table Properties, Positioning, under Options, untick Move with Text and I also unticked Allow Overlap.

I’ve gotten so confused now that I have myself believing this makes sense. With Move with Text unticked, when you type on the line immediately ABOVE the table, as soon as you get to the end or hit enter, you continue below the table. If you have that option ticked (default), the cursor goes briefly under the table, but then flips up above it . So it seems to be correcting itself.

If you’re typing UNDER the table, before the grey line, if the move with option is ticked (default), the line flips up, as you mentioned. If you untick it, it stays put. From under the table, before the next text boundary, if you don’t have boundaries showing, it seems to be the opposite of what the setting implies – Move with text means ‘move against text’ and don’t move with text means ‘stay put’. When you see the boundaries, it seems to indicate that anything above the grey line belongs to the previous boundary, unless Move with is unticked.

Until you drag the table and treat it like a graphic object, that Positioning option doesn’t seem to be available. So that seems sort of clever for it to recognize that it’s being treated like a graphic, therefore it takes on some graphic properties. Someone no doubt requested just such a feature.

Another property, text wrapping, seems to be default. If you change it to No wrapping, then positioning is not available, and the text boundaries disappear from around the table and text stays where you’d expect. This seems to be the simplest way, once you’ve moved a table, to get it to revert to behaving the way tables used to behave. I’m investigating whether this has anything to do with the trouble my friends have had receiving my table files.

I have a template that has a link to a file, and the link works fine in documents based on the template. Maybe try first removing the link (under insert hyperlink, there will be a button that says that), exit from the hyperlink dialog, then go back in and add the link again; make sure to unselect the Use relative path for hyperlink box.

I got it too. I just typed the word activedoc and it went to http://auto.search.msn.com/results.asp?FOR…h=5&q=activedoc with a bunch of hits. MSIE 5.0. Phil, you could use that url if you don’t want to wait.

Thanks for the posting, Gary. Finally, confirmation that it’s not just ME. These new tables have a mind of their own. I’ll check out your findings tomorrow night, but I’ve definitely seen the text moving up in front of a table. They are graphic-like in the way they can be dragged to the left or right.

Check out table properties. I don’t have 2000 here to look at, but I vaguely remember finding some setting that’s similar to ‘in line’ that helped a lot.

As I mentioned at the start of this thread, people have had trouble receiving my Word 2000 files that contain only a table and a header. When I put a continuous section break before the table, they were able to receive and open the file (in some previous cases, some recipients didn’t even receive the file, while others (same mailing) did but couldn’t open it, and one recipient had no problem with it – I’ll have to check who has what version of Word).

Enter works fine in 2000. It really is easy.
Split table works fine too, Jefferson. Everything everyone suggested works fine. Thanks.

I’m looking forward to trying split table, as it sounds familiar. I think Help said to hit enter or split the table, and that’s what makes me think I tried hitting enter last night and it didn’t work. I’ll check these both later. Thanks.

I feel so fortunate to have had help from the great minds of this group. Now I wish I had given the post a better title so I could find it again. However, since it’s been my standard subject line lately (and close to my standard swear words at home), I suppose I’ll remember it.

That’s what I was trying to remember, Phil. That works on the 2000 document opened on 97. I’ll try it at home in 2000 – I have the idea that I tried that, but I’ll check. Thanks.

Well, neither of those was what I was thinking of, but they both work fine. Thanks Bob and Gary.

In Word 97, there was some keystroke that put the cursor in front of the table. I’d be interested to know if it works in 2000, but first I’ll have to find what it is. I’ll look tomorrow.