[Stefan Blom[_3_]]

Note that 106367 does work as a starting number in Word 2007.

--
Stefan Blom
Microsoft Word MVP



"Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote in message
...
I could be wrong about the specific number, but I do recall reading a
thread somewhere in one of these NGs in which this came up, and it was
ascertained that there is some limit to page numbering. Note that this is
NOT a limit to the number of actual pages (see, for example,
http://www.technologyquestions.com/t...-ms-word.html),
just the numbering.

Ah, here we go: according to http://support.microsoft.com/kb/212159, you
can have page numbers from 0 to 32,766 when using arabic numerals, 1-780
using letters of the alphabet, and 1-32,766 using roman numerals. That
article is about Word 2000, but I feel sure there would be no change
through Word 2003; it might be different in Word 2007 (interestingly,
there has been some variation among earlier versions; see
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/176137/en-us).

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

"Island Girl" wrote in message
...
Thanks, Suzanne! Looks like a do-over is in the works!

"Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote:

But the reason that solution was offered is that Word cannot generate
page
numbers larger than (at a guess) 106366.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

"Island Girl" wrote in message
...
Oooops! Thanks, Stefan!

"Stefan Blom" wrote:

Although calculated page numbers work, they won't be used by Word in
cross-references or tables of contents. A better approach is to
change
the
"Start at" value in the Page Number Format dialog box.

--
Stefan Blom
Microsoft Word MVP



"Island Girl" wrote in message
...
Someone wanted each page of a document to have numbers incrementing
from
106367. I'm sure there's a better way, but what I did was put it
in
the
place of page numbers as ={PAGE} + 106366. It worked, but now I'm
wondering
what could go wrong, and what the real method of doing that would
have
been.
There still might be time to change it.

Thanks again and again!


.



.