[Peter Jamieson]

p.s. Is it proper etiquitte to reply w/a thanks, or does that just clog up
the works?

I don't know these days. It's nice to get positive feedback but it's more
useful for posterity when it's confirming that something a bit experimental
actually worked (or didn't). It's probably also worth chopping out
everything beloow the specific message you're responding to.

Peter Jamieson
"Kathy Webster" wrote in message
nk.net...
Found it! Thanks!
p.s. Is it proper etiquitte to reply w/a thanks, or does that just clog up
the works?

"Peter Jamieson" wrote in message
...
(Word 2002.)
2. I clicked Help, Microsoft Word Help, Contents. I don't see
"Automating Tasks and
Programmability"

In Word 2002, the ToC heading is "Field Types and Switches"

Peter Jamieson

"Kathy Webster" wrote in message
ink.net...
1. I tried \*! and I got:
Error! Unknown switch argument.

(Word 2002.)
2. I clicked Help, Microsoft Word Help, Contents. I don't see
"Automating Tasks and
Programmability"

"Peter Jamieson" wrote in message
...
\*! means "lock the result.

Word Help (prior to Word 2007, anyway) is as good a place to start as
any with field codes and switches. Look for "Automating Tasks and
Programmability" in the Table of Contents

I'm so tired of everyone claiming that WP is so much more powerful
than Word in this department...I'm sure its just a matter of learning
the way Word does these things...

Peter Jamieson

"Kathy Webster" wrote in message
k.net...
Wow, what does \*! mean?
Also, since I really have to get up to speed on all these merge codes
and their possibilities, can anyone recommend a good source for
studying all about advanced merge codes features, so I can give
WordPerfect a run for its money? I'm so tired of everyone claiming
that WP is so much more powerful than Word in this department...I'm
sure its just a matter of learning the way Word does these things...


"macropod" wrote in message
...
Hi Kathy,

I'd have thought that, if your {MERGEFIELD Lastname} field had a
charformat switch (ie {MERGEFIELD Lastname \* charformat} and the 'M'
was formatted with the bold and underlined attributes, these would
have been preserved.

Since that seems not to work, have you tried adding a character style
to the {MERGEFIELD Lastname} field in the subdoc, with the bold and
underlined attributes?

Another possibility, is adding a '\*!' switch to your INCLUDTEXT
field.

I'm not sure if either method will work, but it's worth a try.

Cheers
--
macropod
[MVP - Microsoft Word]
-------------------------

"Kathy Webster" wrote in message
news
I'm using the INCLUDETEXT command within a merge document to call in
a subdoc while merging. The subdoc also contains merge fields, ie,
{MERGEFIELD Lastname}. Although the {MERGEFIELD Lastname} field is
bold and underlined in the subdoc, when it merges into the final
product, the bold and underline are gone. I've tried \*mergeformat
and \*charformat with no success.

Can I get some help?
Thanks.