Can I Automatically Insert Section Breaks?

[Ned Bedinger]

Jayaseelan Pannirselvam wrote:
> Edgar D' Souza wrote:
>
>   
>> c) I searched the archives, and didn't find my post in there. 
>> In fact, I searched for "section break" and didn't get any 
>> hits, e
<snip>
> You might want to caveat your code by stating that your code converts
> the Paragraph style in question into section breaks that start on new
> pages. If the requirement is conversion into continuous section breaks,
> all one needs to do is replace "wdSectionBreakNextPage" in the line
> "sel.InsertBreak WdBreakType.wdSectionBreakNextPage" with
> "wdSectionBreakContinuous".
>   
I don't have a current version of Word and I'm no Word goo-roo, but I 
believe that inserting section breaks requires more attention to the 
possibility of existing section breaks, and to header/footer settings, 
before it is fair to unleash Ed's macro as a solution. More power to Ed 
for his good intentions and generosity with his time and skills, but did 
the original writer understand Word well enough to know that Ed's macro 
had the potential for undoing the headers and footers of each section of 
15 documents? We may never know, since the lights at the original 
writer's end of the thread apparently went dark shortly after Ed posted 
his code.
> That little snippet of code that you posted seemed to me to be the
> perfect solution to the OP's query. Not sure why she didn't acknowledge
> that or even why others who posted subsequently on this thread seemed to
> ignore that completely.
>   
If the original question was also sent to more appropriate msword 
newsgroups or mailing lists, it could be that the original writer has 
moved on with a different solution. A complete solution is within reach, 
given more of someone like Ed's uncompensated effort, that would also 
provide automation for choosing files in a common dialog and 
opening/changing/saving all 15 documents in one sweet button click. Or, 
perhaps someone pointed out Word intrinsic functions and options for new 
sections? Isn't there something in Layout for defining the start of new 
sections?

But anyway, as I sometimes like to point out, the 'net has better lists 
than techwr-l for trolling those tool questions under the noses of the 
deep denizens, experts and innovators who give answers and solve 
problems with oracular precision. So, I think many of us prefer not to 
do straight tool questions on techwr-l because simple "How do I..." tool 
queries can become jagged reefs and icebergs before we can reach the 
bottom line response. I myself don't usually pursue a thread that seems 
likely to wind up holed and abandoned in my drafts folder.

But to your point, I didn't just ignore Ed's thread. I read and 
considered it judiciously, because I like the view of tech writing as 
writing with technical tools (code is a good example). My response took 
a MOR (middle of road) path where I didn't comment on his solution 
directly because I read and liked his work but didn't want to get 
involved with the typical imbroglio of a poorly specified problem and 
the stress-inducing designer's impulse to come up with something in 
response to an incomplete specifications.

Still, I do hope that every question posted to techwr-l gets an 
appropriate techwr-l sort of response (it should reflect comprehension 
or active listening, right?). And I loathe the vacuous, tossed-off, 
pissheaded blow-off replies! But of course, so much is spoken by what is 
not said, and my silence on Ed's snippet conveyed my concerns 
adequately, IMHO. Not sure why the original poster hasn't chimed in to 
validate my concerns or even why others have not read my meaning more 
accurately, or have seemed to ignore it completely. But I don't really 
require a response--I grok the 'net as a murky and unfathomable place to 
correspond, wherein lies madness unless you establish an equilibrium 
between the effort to communicate your ideas and the expectation for a 
satisfactory reply.

The posts and threads on techwr-l, in case you haven't seen this, are 
often from a design perspective. Let's face it, we are designers much of 
the time. Like it or not, design is an important problem solving skill 
in our field. We do often have to proceed with incomplete information, 
and it is not always appropriate to tar and feather a question or 
designed solution as a knee-jerk, undigested, hastily thrown together 
histrionical affair arising in ego. Design is an important part of what 
we do. My $.02, not spent all in one place.


Ned Bedinger
doc at edwordsmith.com

"Keyboard not found.  Hit F1 to continue."