Herb,
I acknowledge your needs and they are different from mine and, seemingly,
from those of the NSA (you may wish to consider the earlier refeences to
'Sanitized').
If I redact a document I expect the original to be retained and a copy to be
made during the redaction process.
The process of redaction removes selected text at the behest of the redacter
and this is not a 'find/replace' edit. The text removed will actually be
removed. The Word Redaction add-in might be used to create the third version
of the document retaining the format and indicating what has been removed
should such a document be needed. Where textr is removed the indicatortext
'[REDACTED]' will warn the reader.
Leaving text in place but covered in pipes allows a reader to recover it
through the edit command 'find', even if the process is a little tedious, and
perhaps by changing the text to a light colour such as yellow to print
through the pipes. Similarly, a keyord index may reveal the piped-ouit text.
Leaving the length of text 'redacted' clear to the reader allows the reader
to make sokme guesses as to what has been removed.
The puipose of redactkion is remove the text and leave no clues as to its
contents else why bother?
One way to achieve the process is to
1 edit out the text to be redacted and insert the indicator '[REDACTED]'.
2 create a new document from the edited version, thus saving the original.
3 create a pdf version, watermarked for authentication.
4 publish the pdf.
Ideally a single process should effect this.
And for thopse who wish it, also save the Word Redacted version, and that
could be part of the same process.
Terence Freedman
"Herb Tyson [MVP]" wrote:
I was indeed ignorant of the add-in. I mistakenly thought the gentleperson
was referring to the "track changes" feature. When deleting text in tracking
mode, I aggressively want to be able to see exactly what was deleted. As
TerenceF didn't mention any add-in, I had no idea that that's what he was
talking about, and assumed he must be talking about an actual built-in Word
feature.
If the goal is to replace sections of text with [REDACTED], I'm not at all
sure why any tool at all is needed. It'd be a fairly simple matter to format
text that requires redaction with a new style (e.g., name it Redacted Text),
then do a global find/replace where you match that style in the Find box,
and put [REDACTED] in the Replace box.
But, I'm fond of simple approaches that don't require add-ins, since most
add-ins I've used cause problems.
--
Herb Tyson MS MVP
http://www.herbtyson.com
Please respond in the newsgroups so everyone can follow along.
"Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote in message
...
I was not expressing satisfaction. I have never used the add-in (and have
no
need for it). I was merely pointing out to Herb what it was, since he
seemed
to be ignorant of it.
--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
Word MVP FAQ site: http://word.mvps.org
Email cannot be acknowledged; please post all follow-ups to the newsgroup
so
all may benefit.
"TerenceF" wrote in message
...
Suzanne, Tony and Herb I rejoice that you are content with the product
that
MS alleges is redaction.
It does not conform to NSA's 'Sanitized' view of redaction. I expect
the
'redacted' data in the MS Add-in is accessible through value searches and
indexing thus not removed from the document and still avaialble to a keen
enquirer.
Although there is an add-in to 'remove hidden data'
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en
there is no contiguous product build.
Is MS going to respond to the NSA model of 'redaction'?
Terence Freedman
The National Archives
London, England
"Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote:
No, he's talking about the redaction performed by Microsoft's Redaction
Add-in (for Word 2003 only). See
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...DisplayLang=en
--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
Word MVP FAQ site: http://word.mvps.org
Email cannot be acknowledged; please post all follow-ups to the
newsgroup so
all may benefit.
"Herb Tyson [MVP]" wrote in message
...
What are you talking about?
If you're talking about tracking, it's exceedingly useful and
important to
know exactly what was deleted so that a reviewer can assess the
impact
and
validity of the deletion.
If you're talking about something else, then perhaps you could be a
bit
more
specific so that others can know exactly what feature (and in what
context)
you're talking about.
--
Herb Tyson MS MVP
http://www.herbtyson.com
Please respond in the newsgroups so everyone can follow along.
"TerenceF" wrote in message
...
the redaction process ought to leave no clue as to the origainal
text
length
but ought to indicate missing text by inserting the text
"[REDACTED]".
Block black-out fails to remove the text length clue.
----------------
This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to
the
suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click
the
"I
Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button,
follow
this
link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader
and
then
click "I Agree" in the message pane.
http://www.microsoft.com/office/comm...ocmanagemen t