Hi Cindy,
Are you sure?
No, I wasn't sure. Sorry about that.
I've also often considered doing my own version of this but while the Leigh
Webber version was there it always seemed unnecessary.
If you're thinking of doing your own example, two things to bear in mind
a
a. sometime since Word 2000, Word can get confused when you use "Merge + a
table created via a DATABASE field" - it seems to treat the data source for
the one as the data source for the other. It doesn't always happen, and I do
not know the specific circumstances in which it happens. AFAIK MS is aware
of this problem but a solution seems unlikely.
b. sometime since Word 2000, using a DATABASE field to return a single,
scalar value inline with the text has also become less reliable because Word
now sometimes inserts a paragraph mark after the result. Again, this
behaviour only occurs sometimes (my guess is that something gets corrupted
somewhere as removing normal.dot and the data key seems to fix the problem
temporarily) but again, I don't know what triggers it.
This wouldn't affect the "multiple items per condition" use of the DATABASE
field but it makes the field generally less useful.
Peter J
"Cindy M." wrote in message
news:VA.00000948.006ab3db@speedy...
Hi Peter,
I think either the same material or similar is now at
http://www.knowhow.com/DownloadWord.aspx
Are you sure? I downloaded and looked in the ZIP file
yesterday and I couldn't find a sample for the Database
field, nor the explanation on how to use it...
Cindy Meister
INTER-Solutions, Switzerland
http://homepage.swissonline.ch/cindymeister (last update
Jun 17 2005)
http://www.word.mvps.org
This reply is posted in the Newsgroup; please post any
follow question or reply in the newsgroup and not by e-mail
:-)