[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Author Index (this month)][Thread Index (this month)][Top of Archive]

Re: Word/Weird: inconsistency?

Subject: Re: Word/Weird: inconsistency?
From: Win Day <winday -at- home -dot- com>
To: Peter <pnewman1 -at- home -dot- com>
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 07:19:46 -0400

At 09:38 PM 5/2/00 -0400, Peter wrote:

For a short document Word is OK. Try a long document, (20-35 pages,)
with cross referencing, tables, numbered paragraphs in multiple styles,
three levels of tables of authorities and an index. Word will drive you
nuts. Just my NVHO.


You know, I just don't get it.

I use Word because that's what my clients want me to use. On their behalf, I regularly create and maintain very long documents -- typically in the 200-1000 page range. Lots of cross-references, embedded and linked graphics, tables, equations, captions, index entries, footnotes -- the works.

I have only ever seen two corrupt files. In both instances, I had received the files from someone else, and manipulated them rather than starting with a fresh file and bringing in their contents.

I don't use Frame, although I own it. I bought it a couple of years ago in anticipation of a contract that was eventually cancelled. I have, however, listened without comment to colleagues who grumble and swear at it for a variety of reasons.

Complaints abound for both applications. Use the one you prefer, or the one you're mandated to use. But don't say that long docs can't be done in Word, because they can.

Win
----------------
Win Day
Technical Writer

http://www.wordsplus.net

mailto:winday -at- wordsplus -dot- net

http://members.home.net/winday/index.html




Previous by Author: FYI: Great Web Site on Quotations
Next by Author: RE: TW Trade Schools..Do U?
Previous by Thread: Re: Word/Weird: inconsistency?
Next by Thread: RE: Word/Weird: inconsistency?

[Top of Archive] | [Author Index (this month)] | [Thread Index (this month)]

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads