I don't know any way to do what you're attempting (generate an index based
on just the # entries), but there may be a workaround. You display the XE
fields by displaying Hidden text. It may well be possible, using wild cards,
to search for text preceded by #, remove the #, and add an \f switch to the
end. See
http://www.gmayor.com/replace_using_wildcards.htm and hope that
Graham Mayor will weigh in here and give you the exact strings you need for
the job!
--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org
wrote in message
...
Thank you Suzanne. I was hoping you would reply.
I forgot to mention I am using Word 2002.
Help me understand. In my case with all these hundreds of names already
marked for indexing with a # before the name, can I now use the switches
to
generate an index for just the entries that are preceded (identified?) by
the #?
The only way I found to "reveal" the field code of my present index code
is
by trying to edit the index field and then it appears to be
INDEX \c "3" \z "1033"
Is this modifiable to generate a name index using the way I now have it
marked (#) for index entry? It would not really be practical to re-mark
all
these entries again.
Jeff
Suzanne S. Barnhill wrote:
Yes, there is a better way. Look at the Help topics for the XE and
INDEX fields and note the "identifier" switch that can be added to
the fields. When you create an index entry using the Mark Index Entry
dialog, there is no box to fill in the identifier, so you have to add
it to the field manually. But when you generate an index with a given
identifier, it will include only those XE fields containing that
identifier. The identifier is an \f switch (which Help confusingly
calls "Type" for XE fields and "Identifier" for INDEX fields).
wrote in message
...
I am working on the manuscript of a book where I need to create 2
separate indexes: an index of names and a separate general index.
Actually this is a second edition of this book and the first edition
did have 2 indexes but I forgot how I did it. I do notice that the
"names" to be included in the separate name index were all marked in
their fields with a preceding #. as in:
{XE "#Smith"}
So when I generate the index, all the name entries that should
appear in the separate name index appear at the beginning of the
index where they can be easily identified, cut and pasted. So I
assume that what I did was: cut the names portion, repasted it in
the area labeled "Name Index" and then removed the # from all the
entries. Does that make sense? Is there a better way?
**Is there a way to use search/replace to remove all the # from the
names? Thanks.
Jeff