when you use word to edit an existing html document is there a way to prevent
word from adding style sheets and meta data to the document?. I'm looking at
allowing novice users to use word to edit portions of exisiting html docs and
would like to avoid other changes and added complexity

Hi Dean,

If you turn on [x] confirm conversions at open in
Tools=Options=General
and then open an HTML file in Word you can edit the
source code if you select the 'plain text' rather than
HTML option.

Word interprets and saves .doc files into HTML files for
the main intention of being able to emulate Word .doc features,
so if you open in 'browser/editable' view Word will 'take over'
the file and add its markup.

=====
"Dean" wrote in message news when you use word to edit an existing html document is there a way to prevent
word from adding style sheets and meta data to the document?. I'm looking at
allowing novice users to use word to edit portions of exisiting html docs and
would like to avoid other changes and added complexity
--
Let us know if this helped you,

Bob Buckland ?:-)
MS Office System Products MVP

*Courtesy is not expensive and can pay big dividends*

For Everyday MS Office tips to "use right away" -
http://microsoft.com/events/series/a...andtricks.mspx

"Bob Buckland ?:-\)" 75214.226(At Beautiful Downtown)compuserve.com
wrote in :

Hi Dean,

If you turn on [x] confirm conversions at open in
Tools=Options=General
and then open an HTML file in Word you can edit the
source code if you select the 'plain text' rather than
HTML option.

Word interprets and saves .doc files into HTML files for
the main intention of being able to emulate Word .doc features,
so if you open in 'browser/editable' view Word will 'take over'
the file and add its markup.

=====
"Dean" wrote in message
news when you use word to edit an existing html document is there a way to
prevent word from adding style sheets and meta data to the document?.


NO!!!!
I'm very surprised at the 2nd paragraph response from Bob Buckland?
Perhaps Bob misundertstood you incorrect use of the term "meta data" and
interpreted it as meta tags?

The "meta data" that you refer to is IMPOSSIBLE to elimnate when using
Word for ANY function related to html.
This "meta data" is commonly referred to as Word bloat.



I'm looking at allowing novice users to use word to edit portions of
exisiting html docs and would like to avoid other changes and added
complexity

Why?
Would you instruct people who studying for their US Citizenship in French
History?
Would you teach driver who were preparing to obtain their US Drivers
license the technique of driving on the left side of the road?

If you desire to teach novices how to edit html?
Then why make it complicated for them by insisting on Word as an editor?
Especially when ANY text editor (BTW, one comes with all versions of
Windows and is known as NotePad) will eliminate any possibility of bloat
("meta data") or CSS/Style Sheet corruption.

Hi Don,

Hmmm. Perhaps it wasn't stated clearly.

You can open HTML source and edit it directly in Word and
save it back as you would any other text file and Word won't
see it as an HTML file (i.e. it doesn't add 'bloat' to it).

If you open an HTML file into Word then edit it like any other
Word document then Word adds its markup when you save it back
out and choose HTML.

If folks are using Word only occassionaly to save in Web formats then one of the tradeoffs for file size is going to be the amount
of time in learning new tools and in messaging the content (i.e. beyond just 'save as' from Word) where someone has already created
a newsletter, flyer or document in Word and then doesn't want to spend time do anything other than let folks see it (looking as much
like the Word original as possible) in their browser, then file size is often not a priority concern, certainly not with the size of
some folks 'photo albums' on line these days g

While the 'filtered' web page option in Word doesn't remove 'everything' it does remove a fair amount if the size of the text
portions of the Word file are important to the user.


=======
"Don" wrote in message . 17.102...
NO!!!!
I'm very surprised at the 2nd paragraph response from Bob Buckland?
Perhaps Bob misundertstood you incorrect use of the term "meta data" and
interpreted it as meta tags?

The "meta data" that you refer to is IMPOSSIBLE to elimnate when using
Word for ANY function related to html.
This "meta data" is commonly referred to as Word bloat.
--
Let us know if this helped you,

Bob Buckland ?:-)
MS Office System Products MVP

*Courtesy is not expensive and can pay big dividends*

For Everyday MS Office tips to "use right away" -
http://microsoft.com/events/series/a...andtricks.mspx

"Bob Buckland ?:-\)" 75214.226(At Beautiful Downtown)compuserve.com
wrote in :

Hi Don,

Hmmm. Perhaps it wasn't stated clearly.

You can open HTML source and edit it directly in Word and
save it back as you would any other text file and Word won't
see it as an HTML file (i.e. it doesn't add 'bloat' to it).

If you open an HTML file into Word then edit it like any other
Word document then Word adds its markup when you save it back
out and choose HTML.

If folks are using Word only occassionaly to save in Web formats then
one of the tradeoffs for file size is going to be the amount of time
in learning new tools and in messaging the content (i.e. beyond just
'save as' from Word) where someone has already created a newsletter,
flyer or document in Word and then doesn't want to spend time do
anything other than let folks see it (looking as much like the Word
original as possible) in their browser, then file size is often not a
priority concern, certainly not with the size of some folks 'photo
albums' on line these days g

While the 'filtered' web page option in Word doesn't remove
'everything' it does remove a fair amount if the size of the text
portions of the Word file are important to the user.


=======
"Don" wrote in message
. 17.102...
NO!!!!
I'm very surprised at the 2nd paragraph response from Bob Buckland?
Perhaps Bob misundertstood you incorrect use of the term "meta data"
and interpreted it as meta tags?

The "meta data" that you refer to is IMPOSSIBLE to elimnate when
using
Word for ANY function related to html.
This "meta data" is commonly referred to as Word bloat.


Hello Bob,
Best of holidays to you and yours. Health and happiness for
2006.

Expecting "novices" to sift through the Word bloat in a text file format,
while attempting to conform to the non-addition of Word Syles is
stretching the imagination just a bit g
I'm sure you agree?

html can be difficult enough! Why add to the dilema.

Finding a professional or even somebody non-pro who deals with html on a
regular basis and expecting either of the aformentioned to have either
the patience or tolerance to sift through any of the non-valid or
deprecated data that Word adds to html is stretching the imagination even
further than the aforementioned stretch for "novices" BG

Although using Word might be acceptable for a minimum design of web a
page?
What stray-primose-path has that novice been led down when they decide
they need some real functionality and attempt to find ways of improving
the BAD Word html?
Don't answer!

They start from scratch with both tools and methods which acceptable and
useable. However most of all, html which somebody may assit them with
errors, and willingly.
Word html fails miserably on any of the above accounts.
I don't care how many options or filters you attempt to set in Word!
Bottom-line is you'll always end up with crap!

So please explain why myself, you or anybody should encourage folks to
waste their time using Word to create web pages?

Hi Don,

It was a very nice Holiday for the family I hope yours was as well.

The original poster mentioned wanting to allow folks to open an 'existing' web page
in Word (actually only a portion of the page g) to edit it. My assumption, from that description, is that it was not created in
Word.

So, if the goal is to use the 'editor' software at hand, without having any 'autostuff' involved, you can do that in Word if you
turn on [x] confirm conversion at open in
Tools=Option=General and then use File=open on the .htm file
you get a conversion dialog. Selecting 'plain text' (text, if in Word 2000)
will open the original file, as HTML source, as is and Word will
not add any of the 'bloat' g you refer to when saving it back.
It's basically an 'enhanced' Notepad when in that mode.

If, on the other hand, the web page was created in Word and
is then opened in Word and saved back out from Word as a Word
Filtered Web page, there is no direct HTML experience, just
updating and resaving a page, or even passing it back to a system
that uses input to update existing pages. If that last part is
the case then creating an HTML form in Word that puts out the needed
'portion' of the page (i.e. just the content) that can then be pulled
via email or 'post' process and by an experienced web author or
an automation process, incorporated into a Web page. That works pretty
well.

There are a number of reasons folks use Office in corporate settings one of them is that they're not going to get approval for
additional software on user's machines or they're not going to get support for any training or 'special use work' on software
other than what has an Office 'nameplate' on it.

So it's not a matter of encouraging or discouraging (primrose path, eh g), it's just a question of 'is this is the tool available'
can I get to a result I can live with.

======
"Don" wrote in message 7.102...
Hello Bob,
Best of holidays to you and yours. Health and happiness for
2006.

Expecting "novices" to sift through the Word bloat in a text file format,
while attempting to conform to the non-addition of Word Syles is
stretching the imagination just a bit g
I'm sure you agree?

html can be difficult enough! Why add to the dilema.

Finding a professional or even somebody non-pro who deals with html on a
regular basis and expecting either of the aformentioned to have either
the patience or tolerance to sift through any of the non-valid or
deprecated data that Word adds to html is stretching the imagination even
further than the aforementioned stretch for "novices" BG

Although using Word might be acceptable for a minimum design of web a
page?
What stray-primose-path has that novice been led down when they decide
they need some real functionality and attempt to find ways of improving
the BAD Word html?
Don't answer!

They start from scratch with both tools and methods which acceptable and
useable. However most of all, html which somebody may assit them with
errors, and willingly.
Word html fails miserably on any of the above accounts.
I don't care how many options or filters you attempt to set in Word!
Bottom-line is you'll always end up with crap!

So please explain why myself, you or anybody should encourage folks to
waste their time using Word to create web pages?
--
Let us know if this helped you,

Bob Buckland ?:-)
MS Office System Products MVP

*Courtesy is not expensive and can pay big dividends*

For Everyday MS Office tips to "use right away" -
http://microsoft.com/events/series/a...andtricks.mspx