If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
footnotes with multiple sections
I have a very long technical document (350+ pages) broken up into sections.
My footnotes are continuous by section, for example: 3-1, 3-2, 3-3..... My problem occurs when I have footnotes on multiple pages in the same section. At the beginning of section 3 I have footnotes 3-1, 3-2, 3-3, 3-4, 3-5, and 3-6. At the bottom of the next page of section 3 I have more footnotes that should start with 3-7. Instead they start with 3-9 (the numbering jumps from 3-6 to 3-9). This is a very large, complex document with a lot of links hidden in the text. I believe it was originally written with WordPerfect (a long time ago). I am tasked with fixing this footnote problem and would like to know if there is an easy way to fix the formatting problem |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Have you been using track changes?
What version of Word? Are your footnotes *really* numbered 3-1, 3-2, etc? Because I didn't realize Word offered that as a number format choice, which makes me wonder if your notes are actually custom marks. If you insert a new note, do all the others automatically update in number? There have been problems with footnotes in documents converting from WP... On 12/17/04 10:09 AM, "dcn1396" wrote: I have a very long technical document (350+ pages) broken up into sections. My footnotes are continuous by section, for example: 3-1, 3-2, 3-3..... My problem occurs when I have footnotes on multiple pages in the same section. At the beginning of section 3 I have footnotes 3-1, 3-2, 3-3, 3-4, 3-5, and 3-6. At the bottom of the next page of section 3 I have more footnotes that should start with 3-7. Instead they start with 3-9 (the numbering jumps from 3-6 to 3-9). This is a very large, complex document with a lot of links hidden in the text. I believe it was originally written with WordPerfect (a long time ago). I am tasked with fixing this footnote problem and would like to know if there is an easy way to fix the formatting problem -- Daiya Mitchell, MVP Mac/Word Word FAQ: http://www.word.mvps.org/ MacWord Tips: http://www.word.mvps.org/MacWordNew/ What's an MVP? A volunteer! Read the FAQ: http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Daiya,
Yes we are using track changes. Whoever first put in the original footnotes was pretty tricky. What I think they did was insert them as a regular footnote 1, 2, 3, 4. Then they manually typed the following code in front of the formatted number to get the section number: REF _Ref480250960 \r \t \* MERGEFORMAT I accessed this code by highlighting the section number in the footnote, right clicking, then selecting "Toggle Field Codes." "Daiya Mitchell" wrote: Have you been using track changes? What version of Word? Are your footnotes *really* numbered 3-1, 3-2, etc? Because I didn't realize Word offered that as a number format choice, which makes me wonder if your notes are actually custom marks. If you insert a new note, do all the others automatically update in number? There have been problems with footnotes in documents converting from WP... On 12/17/04 10:09 AM, "dcn1396" wrote: I have a very long technical document (350+ pages) broken up into sections. My footnotes are continuous by section, for example: 3-1, 3-2, 3-3..... My problem occurs when I have footnotes on multiple pages in the same section. At the beginning of section 3 I have footnotes 3-1, 3-2, 3-3, 3-4, 3-5, and 3-6. At the bottom of the next page of section 3 I have more footnotes that should start with 3-7. Instead they start with 3-9 (the numbering jumps from 3-6 to 3-9). This is a very large, complex document with a lot of links hidden in the text. I believe it was originally written with WordPerfect (a long time ago). I am tasked with fixing this footnote problem and would like to know if there is an easy way to fix the formatting problem -- Daiya Mitchell, MVP Mac/Word Word FAQ: http://www.word.mvps.org/ MacWord Tips: http://www.word.mvps.org/MacWordNew/ What's an MVP? A volunteer! Read the FAQ: http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/ |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Hmm...
If you are tracking changes, the footnote numbers will not sort themselves out until you have accepted all changes. By the way, what you have (I think) is a cross-reference next to a footnote. Footnotes update without the user doing anything--Cross-References you have to manually update by Select All (cntl-A), then hitting F9 to Update Fields. But select all only selects main text, not headers, etc, so you might have to do that multiple places. All that's just FYI, I think Track Changes is causing the issue you reported. I'll have to remember that trick, although using a field to get the Section number might have worked better. Daiya On 12/17/04 11:01 AM, "dcn1396" wrote: Hi Daiya, Yes we are using track changes. Whoever first put in the original footnotes was pretty tricky. What I think they did was insert them as a regular footnote 1, 2, 3, 4. Then they manually typed the following code in front of the formatted number to get the section number: REF _Ref480250960 \r \t \* MERGEFORMAT I accessed this code by highlighting the section number in the footnote, right clicking, then selecting "Toggle Field Codes." |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
How can I add multiple items to one field? | Would rather be surveying | New Users | 4 | December 6th, 2004 10:07 PM |
STORE multiple values from a lookup table to another table. | beller | Database Design | 0 | June 15th, 2004 04:42 AM |
Page Numbering, X of Y, where Y includes total # of continuous Sections | Exervio | Page Layout | 1 | May 17th, 2004 02:32 PM |
Multiple Many-To-Many Tables | Tom | Database Design | 7 | May 15th, 2004 03:47 AM |
Multiple values in a single cell, and validation | Harlan Grove | Worksheet Functions | 1 | December 5th, 2003 07:58 PM |