[Aliera2]

In philosophy it's customary to use the Chicago/Turabian documentation
styles. Word offers Chicago and Turabian as style choices (not even sure why
they are separate choices), but the formatting for them is incorrect (or, at
least, it's incomplete).

My 1st Problem: Word 2007 only adds parenthetical citations to the
bibliography; the common practice for Chicago style is to cite using
footnotes, and it'd be really convenient if my footnoted citations were added
to my master source list and bibliography.

2nd Problem: Word formats the bibliography/works cited entries incorrectly
for Chicago/Turabian style. The first line of an entry should be flush left,
but any additional lines must be indented 5 spaces. It should be simple a
simple matter of just indenting the text, but the program won't let me do it.

Can I change the settings for Chicago/Turabian reference styles? Is there
any way to do this short of having to right code (or XML... I don't even know
what it's called, let alone how to do that!)

Please help if you know how!

Thank you.

[EPIjb]

Chicago style isn't the only one with an indented bibliography. You can use
a hanging indent to easily solve your problem. Click in the text at the spot
you want to indent (the second line of the entry). In the ruler at the top
of the page, drag the bottom half of the hourglass-looking thing over five
spaces. That will indent all subsequent lines after the first in an entry.

"Aliera2" wrote:

In philosophy it's customary to use the Chicago/Turabian documentation
styles. Word offers Chicago and Turabian as style choices (not even sure why
they are separate choices), but the formatting for them is incorrect (or, at
least, it's incomplete).

My 1st Problem: Word 2007 only adds parenthetical citations to the
bibliography; the common practice for Chicago style is to cite using
footnotes, and it'd be really convenient if my footnoted citations were added
to my master source list and bibliography.

2nd Problem: Word formats the bibliography/works cited entries incorrectly
for Chicago/Turabian style. The first line of an entry should be flush left,
but any additional lines must be indented 5 spaces. It should be simple a
simple matter of just indenting the text, but the program won't let me do it.

Can I change the settings for Chicago/Turabian reference styles? Is there
any way to do this short of having to right code (or XML... I don't even know
what it's called, let alone how to do that!)

Please help if you know how!

Thank you.

[Aliera2]

THank you so much for your quick reply.

I had tried to move the arrows, but was moving the wrong one, so your advice
washelpful, thank you. I know other documentation styles have similar
formats, but I only have to worry about the Chicago/Turabian for now.

Is there any way to totally customize the Reference Groups default settings?

I still don't understand why footnote reference entries aren't added to the
bibliography. There's no way to customize the Reference group settings?
Microsoft's formatting of the bibliography/works cited pages is erroneous in
silly ways. For example, I can only imagine submitting a paper to my
professor for review that had a bold, blue "Works Cited" title. Luckily, that
actually was easy to fix.

The references group still has so many limitations, I just really wish
Microsoft had included in their 2007 version all the features offered by the
StyleEase or Endnote programs. It's well within their capabilities to have
done so. If the Office Suite had only cost me around $40 I wouldn't be so
demanding, but since I had to spend $150 on it, I have higher expectations.

"EPIjb" wrote:

Chicago style isn't the only one with an indented bibliography. You can use
a hanging indent to easily solve your problem. Click in the text at the spot
you want to indent (the second line of the entry). In the ruler at the top
of the page, drag the bottom half of the hourglass-looking thing over five
spaces. That will indent all subsequent lines after the first in an entry.

"Aliera2" wrote:

In philosophy it's customary to use the Chicago/Turabian documentation
styles. Word offers Chicago and Turabian as style choices (not even sure why
they are separate choices), but the formatting for them is incorrect (or, at
least, it's incomplete).

My 1st Problem: Word 2007 only adds parenthetical citations to the
bibliography; the common practice for Chicago style is to cite using
footnotes, and it'd be really convenient if my footnoted citations were added
to my master source list and bibliography.

2nd Problem: Word formats the bibliography/works cited entries incorrectly
for Chicago/Turabian style. The first line of an entry should be flush left,
but any additional lines must be indented 5 spaces. It should be simple a
simple matter of just indenting the text, but the program won't let me do it.

Can I change the settings for Chicago/Turabian reference styles? Is there
any way to do this short of having to right code (or XML... I don't even know
what it's called, let alone how to do that!)

Please help if you know how!

Thank you.

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

If you paid just $150 for the Office Suite, you got a bargain, as even
Office Standard retails for $399.95, with prices for other versions ranging
up to $679.95 for Office Ultimate. Presumably you got the Home and Student
version, which is really intended for use by families with young children.
If you are a university student, you may be able to get EndNote at a similar
promotional price.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA

"Aliera2" wrote in message
...
THank you so much for your quick reply.

I had tried to move the arrows, but was moving the wrong one, so your
advice
washelpful, thank you. I know other documentation styles have similar
formats, but I only have to worry about the Chicago/Turabian for now.

Is there any way to totally customize the Reference Groups default
settings?

I still don't understand why footnote reference entries aren't added to
the
bibliography. There's no way to customize the Reference group settings?
Microsoft's formatting of the bibliography/works cited pages is erroneous
in
silly ways. For example, I can only imagine submitting a paper to my
professor for review that had a bold, blue "Works Cited" title. Luckily,
that
actually was easy to fix.

The references group still has so many limitations, I just really wish
Microsoft had included in their 2007 version all the features offered by
the
StyleEase or Endnote programs. It's well within their capabilities to have
done so. If the Office Suite had only cost me around $40 I wouldn't be so
demanding, but since I had to spend $150 on it, I have higher
expectations.

"EPIjb" wrote:

Chicago style isn't the only one with an indented bibliography. You can
use
a hanging indent to easily solve your problem. Click in the text at the
spot
you want to indent (the second line of the entry). In the ruler at the
top
of the page, drag the bottom half of the hourglass-looking thing over
five
spaces. That will indent all subsequent lines after the first in an
entry.

"Aliera2" wrote:

In philosophy it's customary to use the Chicago/Turabian documentation
styles. Word offers Chicago and Turabian as style choices (not even
sure why
they are separate choices), but the formatting for them is incorrect
(or, at
least, it's incomplete).

My 1st Problem: Word 2007 only adds parenthetical citations to the
bibliography; the common practice for Chicago style is to cite using
footnotes, and it'd be really convenient if my footnoted citations were
added
to my master source list and bibliography.

2nd Problem: Word formats the bibliography/works cited entries
incorrectly
for Chicago/Turabian style. The first line of an entry should be flush
left,
but any additional lines must be indented 5 spaces. It should be simple
a
simple matter of just indenting the text, but the program won't let me
do it.

Can I change the settings for Chicago/Turabian reference styles? Is
there
any way to do this short of having to right code (or XML... I don't
even know
what it's called, let alone how to do that!)

Please help if you know how!

Thank you.

[Aliera2]

Thank you for replying.
It wasn't clear to me that by "student" Microsoft meant only pre-university
level students. However, I think the Word program is the same in all the
suites; you just get more programs the more you pay.

It's just a shame that this new Reference feature, which could be so
potentially helpful, has these flaws. If Microsoft wanted to they could just
include in Word everything that Endnote (also very pricey) does in its
program. If we could just modify the given settings for this feature it
wouldn't be a problem.... if there's a way to do this, please let me know.

If it's helpful to anyone with similar issues, there's an inexpensive
program called StyleEase that's similar to Endnote, and so far it seems
compatible with the new Word.

Again, thank you for your responses,
- E.

"Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote:

If you paid just $150 for the Office Suite, you got a bargain, as even
Office Standard retails for $399.95, with prices for other versions ranging
up to $679.95 for Office Ultimate. Presumably you got the Home and Student
version, which is really intended for use by families with young children.
If you are a university student, you may be able to get EndNote at a similar
promotional price.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA

"Aliera2" wrote in message
...
THank you so much for your quick reply.

I had tried to move the arrows, but was moving the wrong one, so your
advice
washelpful, thank you. I know other documentation styles have similar
formats, but I only have to worry about the Chicago/Turabian for now.

Is there any way to totally customize the Reference Groups default
settings?

I still don't understand why footnote reference entries aren't added to
the
bibliography. There's no way to customize the Reference group settings?
Microsoft's formatting of the bibliography/works cited pages is erroneous
in
silly ways. For example, I can only imagine submitting a paper to my
professor for review that had a bold, blue "Works Cited" title. Luckily,
that
actually was easy to fix.

The references group still has so many limitations, I just really wish
Microsoft had included in their 2007 version all the features offered by
the
StyleEase or Endnote programs. It's well within their capabilities to have
done so. If the Office Suite had only cost me around $40 I wouldn't be so
demanding, but since I had to spend $150 on it, I have higher
expectations.

"EPIjb" wrote:

Chicago style isn't the only one with an indented bibliography. You can
use
a hanging indent to easily solve your problem. Click in the text at the
spot
you want to indent (the second line of the entry). In the ruler at the
top
of the page, drag the bottom half of the hourglass-looking thing over
five
spaces. That will indent all subsequent lines after the first in an
entry.

"Aliera2" wrote:

In philosophy it's customary to use the Chicago/Turabian documentation
styles. Word offers Chicago and Turabian as style choices (not even
sure why
they are separate choices), but the formatting for them is incorrect
(or, at
least, it's incomplete).

My 1st Problem: Word 2007 only adds parenthetical citations to the
bibliography; the common practice for Chicago style is to cite using
footnotes, and it'd be really convenient if my footnoted citations were
added
to my master source list and bibliography.

2nd Problem: Word formats the bibliography/works cited entries
incorrectly
for Chicago/Turabian style. The first line of an entry should be flush
left,
but any additional lines must be indented 5 spaces. It should be simple
a
simple matter of just indenting the text, but the program won't let me
do it.

Can I change the settings for Chicago/Turabian reference styles? Is
there
any way to do this short of having to right code (or XML... I don't
even know
what it's called, let alone how to do that!)

Please help if you know how!

Thank you.

[grammatim[_2_]]

I checked out StyleEase after Aliera2's posting a couple of weeks ago,
and it's clear from the documentation (Chicago version) that it can't
be used by a serious scholar. The first drawback is that it simply
doesn't allow you to have both in-text parenthesized references and
references in footnotes in the same document. The second is that no
scholar will ever have to prepare papers in only one (of just four
available!) formats, and the cost of the four (uncustomizable!)
different applications goes a long way toward the purchase price of
EndNote. (And it doesn't seem to have provisions for such arcane but
essential additions as both editors and translators of a single work.)
The most sophisticated such program I've encountered was Papyrus, a
Mac-only app whose developer gave it up when he realized that adapting
it to OS X would be an overwhelming task. (It probably doesn't have
the web-search abilities of the more recent generations of such
tools.)

Incidentally, "Turabian" and "Chicago" are not the same. "Turabian" is
for unpublished work, from the weekly essay through the term paper to
the M.A. thesis and the Ph.D. dissertation; "Chicago," which is based
on it, is for published work. Mrs. Turabian (who had retired by the
time I became involved with the University of Chicago Press ca. 1975)
was the Press's Chief Manuscript Editor; she _may_ also, or at one
time, have been the University's Dissertation Secretary, a single
person whose responsibility was to see that every dissertation
submitted in every department of the university adhered to the
specified format. (There were typists who made a good living typing
dissertations for Ph.D. candidates who were thus relieved of the
necessity of mastering the arcana.) During my whole 25 years in
Chicago, the Dissertation Secretary was Geoffrey Plampin, a delightful
gentleman whom I knew from his many, many theatrical appearances (for
instance, as the Butler in *The Importance of Being Earnest*; we were
in *Ionlanthe* together in 1973).

Alas I fear that in the day of electronic manuscript preparation, the
notion of perfectly uniform style may have gone by the wayside, just
as the University of Chicago Press itself now states in the Manual
that a manuscript that has been prepared with perfect consistency
using _some other style_ can be published by the Press. (Mrs. Turabian
would not be pleased!)

On Mar 30, 11:31*pm, Aliera2
wrote:
Thank you for replying.
It wasn't clear to me that by "student" Microsoft meant only pre-university
level students. However, I think the Word program is the same in all the
suites; you just get more programs the more you pay.

It's just a shame that this new Reference feature, which could be so
potentially helpful, has these flaws. If Microsoft wanted to they could just
include in Word everything that Endnote (also very pricey) does in its
program. If we could just modify the given settings for this feature it
wouldn't be a problem.... if there's a way to do this, please let me know.

If it's helpful to anyone with similar issues, there's an inexpensive
program called StyleEase that's similar to Endnote, and so far it seems
compatible with the new Word.

Again, thank you for your responses,
- E.



"Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote:
If you paid just $150 for the Office Suite, you got a bargain, as even
Office Standard retails for $399.95, with prices for other versions ranging
up to $679.95 for Office Ultimate. Presumably you got the Home and Student
version, which is really intended for use by families with young children.

[Bob Buckland ?:-\)]

Hi Aliera,

I've crossposted this into the Word:mac discussion group as well as its present location in the Winword document management
discussion group.

It is my understanding that the Word:mac 2008 Citation & Bibliography (C&B) feature, while in a somewhat different User Interface,
is for the most part common to Word 2007 and Word 2008. Daiya Mitchell, Word/mac MVP, among others there has experience from both
the Word user point of view and from the academia view point on this topic (as can folks here in the WinWord group) and we can, I
hope, benefit from understanding, expanding and taming this feature through discussion of it and the clarity others can add to to
this that I may overlook (or mistake) g. There have been discussions in that group (as well as in the Word 'en Espanol'
discussion group on this feature

You bring up an interesting point about how Word formats the 'Works Cited' and 'Bibliography' items inserted in Word documents when
you mentioned that

Word formats the bibliography/works cited entries incorrectly
for Chicago/Turabian style. The first line of an entry should be flush left, but any additional lines must be indented 5 spaces.
It should be simple a simple matter of just indenting the text, but the program won't let me do it.

You also mentioned that you expected Word's bibilography feature to pickup footnotes to include as well, but the way the feature is
structured that isn't quite, as I understand, an intent.

As I see it, how Word 2007 does the bibliography creation is mainly 'behind the scenes' but you can do a bit of tweaking without
knowing how to XML or needing to work with the underlying XML. (One of the folks who frequents the Word:mac discussion group is
Joonhwan Lee - who has already done a bit of customizing of the underlying XML and is, to my understanding, working on additional
tools that will make that a bit easier to do for the average user.

To my understanding, the Word 2007
Reference Tab=Citation & Bibliography (C&B) Group
use of C&B-styles relates primarily to how the content that is presented for each of the 10, Microsoft provided C&B-styles is
applied in three locations in Word:

1. The default fields shown for a specific Source reference type when you're in
Manage Sources=Source Manager=Edit Source dialog

2. The content selected to be inserted in a document when you use
Insert Citation (where Word is inserting a 'Citation' field)
when you select 'Insert Citation'

3. The content and basic text formatting when you insert a {Bibliography} field into a Word document by clicking on the
'Bibliography' dropdown choie. This is usually done from the out-of-the-box pair of Word Document Building block entries in the
Bibliography gallery, which a

- Bibliography
- Works Cited

Side note: Document Building blocks are Autotext engine driven reusable content blocks of information accessible in several ways.
One of those ways includes the 'Bibliography gallery'. (There are 36 separately accessible Building Block Galleries in Word 2007).
All Building Block entries are managed and viewable from the Building Blocks organizer in
Insert=Quick Parts=Building Block Organizer.
If you visit that dialog you'll see the listing for the two basic entries mentioned above.

When you create a 'Works Cited' or 'Bibliography' in a Word document you are inserting a content control that in the out-of-the-box
gallery entries consist of two parts

a. The first part of the entry is a title, formatted with the 'Heading 1' Word paragraph style. It is not necessarily a 'silly
blue' g color that you mentioned, but rather it reflects the currently applied theme, Quick Style set and Font Major/Minor pair
applied to the document. You can also add your own entries to the Bibliography gallery, so that you can insert an entry with a
different heading, or no heading when you wish.

b. The second part of the bibliography field that takes on the formatting of Word's Bibliography style is a listing Word builds
by reading the 'cited' (used in document) checkmark in the Manage Source list and then each of the tagged entries there to create
individual elements of the Bibliography/WorksCited list. While you can apply a different Word paragraph style to the bibliography
field, when you update the field/bibliogray Word throws off that change and reapplies the currently active bibliography paragraph
style.

The 'Bibliography' paragraph style does not, out-of-the-box, appear to contain any paragraph indenting. You can redefine that
paragraph style in Word for all documents created from a single template or for just one document. If you believe that a 2nd line
indent is needed that could be part of a redefined Bibliography paragraph style.

The Bibliography paragraph style is based on Word's 'normal' paragraph style, and as it comes out-of-the-box it appears to be pretty
much the same as the 'normal' style.

When you insert either a Citation or a Bibliography/WorksCited entry into your document Word queries the underlying XML/XSL files
for that style and enters what it's told by those files to select for content for the currently chosen C&B-Style and the order it is
to arrange these in. For the bibliography it also applies on top of the Bibliography paragraph style any direct formatting needed
for
italics, bold, underline and note reference/numbering.

[Word does not appear to include a 'Citation' style out of the box for inserting individual Citations.]

Ideally, it would seem, prior to submitting a final paper, using the ability of the Works Cited and Bibliography content control
entries, to convert to static text (so it doesn't get changed by reviewers). Once it's static text you can certainly reapply a
different paragraph style, but would have to be careful to not undo the direct formatting applied as described above.

Joonhwan Lee has a tool that works, so far, only on the mac last time I looked, that allows you to drag and drop source entries
from BibTex onto the widget and it converts them to Word:mac 2008 sources. It is available at
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~joonhwan/personal.html
Word 2007 is supposed to have a similar ability that allows sources to be copied over using the reference pane, but that has to be
implemented by the provider of the content, as I understand it, and so far I haven't run across a research pane source that does
this. There are other 3rd party tools becoming available to convert from/to Word 2007 sources.

For issues where the underlying content fields or layout are considered to be wrong/missing etc (including 'where is Harvard
Referencing Style' g) that would probably best be discussed separately from the visual formatting. From what I gather, in
addition to two Microsoft articles on modifying the underlying XML/XSL files, Joonhwan may be working on tools to do that as well.

================
"Aliera2" wrote in message ...
THank you so much for your quick reply.

I had tried to move the arrows, but was moving the wrong one, so your advice was helpful, thank you. I know other documentation
styles have similar formats, but I only have to worry about the Chicago/Turabian for now.

Is there any way to totally customize the Reference Groups default settings?

I still don't understand why footnote reference entries aren't added to the bibliography. There's no way to customize the Reference
group settings? Microsoft's formatting of the bibliography/works cited pages is erroneous in silly ways. For example, I can only
imagine submitting a paper to my professor for review that had a bold, blue "Works Cited" title. Luckily, that actually was easy to
fix.

The references group still has so many limitations, I just really wish
Microsoft had included in their 2007 version all the features offered by the StyleEase or Endnote programs. It's well within their
capabilities to have done so. If the Office Suite had only cost me around $40 I wouldn't be so demanding, but since I had to spend
$150 on it, I have higher expectations.
--

Bob Buckland ?:-)
MS Office System Products MVP

*Courtesy is not expensive and can pay big dividends*

[Aliera2]

Thank you.

"Bob Buckland ?:-)" wrote:

Hi Aliera,

I've crossposted this into the Word:mac discussion group as well as its present location in the Winword document management
discussion group.

It is my understanding that the Word:mac 2008 Citation & Bibliography (C&B) feature, while in a somewhat different User Interface,
is for the most part common to Word 2007 and Word 2008. Daiya Mitchell, Word/mac MVP, among others there has experience from both
the Word user point of view and from the academia view point on this topic (as can folks here in the WinWord group) and we can, I
hope, benefit from understanding, expanding and taming this feature through discussion of it and the clarity others can add to to
this that I may overlook (or mistake) g. There have been discussions in that group (as well as in the Word 'en Espanol'
discussion group on this feature

You bring up an interesting point about how Word formats the 'Works Cited' and 'Bibliography' items inserted in Word documents when
you mentioned that

Word formats the bibliography/works cited entries incorrectly
for Chicago/Turabian style. The first line of an entry should be flush left, but any additional lines must be indented 5 spaces.
It should be simple a simple matter of just indenting the text, but the program won't let me do it.

You also mentioned that you expected Word's bibilography feature to pickup footnotes to include as well, but the way the feature is
structured that isn't quite, as I understand, an intent.

As I see it, how Word 2007 does the bibliography creation is mainly 'behind the scenes' but you can do a bit of tweaking without
knowing how to XML or needing to work with the underlying XML. (One of the folks who frequents the Word:mac discussion group is
Joonhwan Lee - who has already done a bit of customizing of the underlying XML and is, to my understanding, working on additional
tools that will make that a bit easier to do for the average user.

To my understanding, the Word 2007
Reference Tab=Citation & Bibliography (C&B) Group
use of C&B-styles relates primarily to how the content that is presented for each of the 10, Microsoft provided C&B-styles is
applied in three locations in Word:

1. The default fields shown for a specific Source reference type when you're in
Manage Sources=Source Manager=Edit Source dialog

2. The content selected to be inserted in a document when you use
Insert Citation (where Word is inserting a 'Citation' field)
when you select 'Insert Citation'

3. The content and basic text formatting when you insert a {Bibliography} field into a Word document by clicking on the
'Bibliography' dropdown choie. This is usually done from the out-of-the-box pair of Word Document Building block entries in the
Bibliography gallery, which a

- Bibliography
- Works Cited

Side note: Document Building blocks are Autotext engine driven reusable content blocks of information accessible in several ways.
One of those ways includes the 'Bibliography gallery'. (There are 36 separately accessible Building Block Galleries in Word 2007).
All Building Block entries are managed and viewable from the Building Blocks organizer in
Insert=Quick Parts=Building Block Organizer.
If you visit that dialog you'll see the listing for the two basic entries mentioned above.

When you create a 'Works Cited' or 'Bibliography' in a Word document you are inserting a content control that in the out-of-the-box
gallery entries consist of two parts

a. The first part of the entry is a title, formatted with the 'Heading 1' Word paragraph style. It is not necessarily a 'silly
blue' g color that you mentioned, but rather it reflects the currently applied theme, Quick Style set and Font Major/Minor pair
applied to the document. You can also add your own entries to the Bibliography gallery, so that you can insert an entry with a
different heading, or no heading when you wish.

b. The second part of the bibliography field that takes on the formatting of Word's Bibliography style is a listing Word builds
by reading the 'cited' (used in document) checkmark in the Manage Source list and then each of the tagged entries there to create
individual elements of the Bibliography/WorksCited list. While you can apply a different Word paragraph style to the bibliography
field, when you update the field/bibliogray Word throws off that change and reapplies the currently active bibliography paragraph
style.

The 'Bibliography' paragraph style does not, out-of-the-box, appear to contain any paragraph indenting. You can redefine that
paragraph style in Word for all documents created from a single template or for just one document. If you believe that a 2nd line
indent is needed that could be part of a redefined Bibliography paragraph style.

The Bibliography paragraph style is based on Word's 'normal' paragraph style, and as it comes out-of-the-box it appears to be pretty
much the same as the 'normal' style.

When you insert either a Citation or a Bibliography/WorksCited entry into your document Word queries the underlying XML/XSL files
for that style and enters what it's told by those files to select for content for the currently chosen C&B-Style and the order it is
to arrange these in. For the bibliography it also applies on top of the Bibliography paragraph style any direct formatting needed
for
italics, bold, underline and note reference/numbering.

[Word does not appear to include a 'Citation' style out of the box for inserting individual Citations.]

Ideally, it would seem, prior to submitting a final paper, using the ability of the Works Cited and Bibliography content control
entries, to convert to static text (so it doesn't get changed by reviewers). Once it's static text you can certainly reapply a
different paragraph style, but would have to be careful to not undo the direct formatting applied as described above.

Joonhwan Lee has a tool that works, so far, only on the mac last time I looked, that allows you to drag and drop source entries
from BibTex onto the widget and it converts them to Word:mac 2008 sources. It is available at
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~joonhwan/personal.html
Word 2007 is supposed to have a similar ability that allows sources to be copied over using the reference pane, but that has to be
implemented by the provider of the content, as I understand it, and so far I haven't run across a research pane source that does
this. There are other 3rd party tools becoming available to convert from/to Word 2007 sources.

For issues where the underlying content fields or layout are considered to be wrong/missing etc (including 'where is Harvard
Referencing Style' g) that would probably best be discussed separately from the visual formatting. From what I gather, in
addition to two Microsoft articles on modifying the underlying XML/XSL files, Joonhwan may be working on tools to do that as well.

================
"Aliera2" wrote in message ...
THank you so much for your quick reply.

I had tried to move the arrows, but was moving the wrong one, so your advice was helpful, thank you. I know other documentation
styles have similar formats, but I only have to worry about the Chicago/Turabian for now.

Is there any way to totally customize the Reference Groups default settings?

I still don't understand why footnote reference entries aren't added to the bibliography. There's no way to customize the Reference
group settings? Microsoft's formatting of the bibliography/works cited pages is erroneous in silly ways. For example, I can only
imagine submitting a paper to my professor for review that had a bold, blue "Works Cited" title. Luckily, that actually was easy to
fix.

The references group still has so many limitations, I just really wish
Microsoft had included in their 2007 version all the features offered by the StyleEase or Endnote programs. It's well within their
capabilities to have done so. If the Office Suite had only cost me around $40 I wouldn't be so demanding, but since I had to spend
$150 on it, I have higher expectations.
--

Bob Buckland ?:-)
MS Office System Products MVP

*Courtesy is not expensive and can pay big dividends*

[angry lucie3]

I bought this computer to help me with my school work it is a horror to know
this citation part is a joke.You spend all this time putting in citation and
referencing only to find you are finish and no citation or referencing in
your work.Now i supose you have to buy some other parts which will cost you
to buy another computer and the money list goes on and on with no
productivity. Point bland this is deceiving at best.
Thanks for nothing.I am stuck ,have to be hand writing my citations and
referencing I should sue microsoft if I fail my paper.

"Aliera2" wrote:

Thank you.

"Bob Buckland ?:-)" wrote:

Hi Aliera,

I've crossposted this into the Word:mac discussion group as well as its present location in the Winword document management
discussion group.

It is my understanding that the Word:mac 2008 Citation & Bibliography (C&B) feature, while in a somewhat different User Interface,
is for the most part common to Word 2007 and Word 2008. Daiya Mitchell, Word/mac MVP, among others there has experience from both
the Word user point of view and from the academia view point on this topic (as can folks here in the WinWord group) and we can, I
hope, benefit from understanding, expanding and taming this feature through discussion of it and the clarity others can add to to
this that I may overlook (or mistake) g. There have been discussions in that group (as well as in the Word 'en Espanol'
discussion group on this feature

You bring up an interesting point about how Word formats the 'Works Cited' and 'Bibliography' items inserted in Word documents when
you mentioned that

Word formats the bibliography/works cited entries incorrectly
for Chicago/Turabian style. The first line of an entry should be flush left, but any additional lines must be indented 5 spaces.
It should be simple a simple matter of just indenting the text, but the program won't let me do it.

You also mentioned that you expected Word's bibilography feature to pickup footnotes to include as well, but the way the feature is
structured that isn't quite, as I understand, an intent.

As I see it, how Word 2007 does the bibliography creation is mainly 'behind the scenes' but you can do a bit of tweaking without
knowing how to XML or needing to work with the underlying XML. (One of the folks who frequents the Word:mac discussion group is
Joonhwan Lee - who has already done a bit of customizing of the underlying XML and is, to my understanding, working on additional
tools that will make that a bit easier to do for the average user.

To my understanding, the Word 2007
Reference Tab=Citation & Bibliography (C&B) Group
use of C&B-styles relates primarily to how the content that is presented for each of the 10, Microsoft provided C&B-styles is
applied in three locations in Word:

1. The default fields shown for a specific Source reference type when you're in
Manage Sources=Source Manager=Edit Source dialog

2. The content selected to be inserted in a document when you use
Insert Citation (where Word is inserting a 'Citation' field)
when you select 'Insert Citation'

3. The content and basic text formatting when you insert a {Bibliography} field into a Word document by clicking on the
'Bibliography' dropdown choie. This is usually done from the out-of-the-box pair of Word Document Building block entries in the
Bibliography gallery, which a

- Bibliography
- Works Cited

Side note: Document Building blocks are Autotext engine driven reusable content blocks of information accessible in several ways.
One of those ways includes the 'Bibliography gallery'. (There are 36 separately accessible Building Block Galleries in Word 2007).
All Building Block entries are managed and viewable from the Building Blocks organizer in
Insert=Quick Parts=Building Block Organizer.
If you visit that dialog you'll see the listing for the two basic entries mentioned above.

When you create a 'Works Cited' or 'Bibliography' in a Word document you are inserting a content control that in the out-of-the-box
gallery entries consist of two parts

a. The first part of the entry is a title, formatted with the 'Heading 1' Word paragraph style. It is not necessarily a 'silly
blue' g color that you mentioned, but rather it reflects the currently applied theme, Quick Style set and Font Major/Minor pair
applied to the document. You can also add your own entries to the Bibliography gallery, so that you can insert an entry with a
different heading, or no heading when you wish.

b. The second part of the bibliography field that takes on the formatting of Word's Bibliography style is a listing Word builds
by reading the 'cited' (used in document) checkmark in the Manage Source list and then each of the tagged entries there to create
individual elements of the Bibliography/WorksCited list. While you can apply a different Word paragraph style to the bibliography
field, when you update the field/bibliogray Word throws off that change and reapplies the currently active bibliography paragraph
style.

The 'Bibliography' paragraph style does not, out-of-the-box, appear to contain any paragraph indenting. You can redefine that
paragraph style in Word for all documents created from a single template or for just one document. If you believe that a 2nd line
indent is needed that could be part of a redefined Bibliography paragraph style.

The Bibliography paragraph style is based on Word's 'normal' paragraph style, and as it comes out-of-the-box it appears to be pretty
much the same as the 'normal' style.

When you insert either a Citation or a Bibliography/WorksCited entry into your document Word queries the underlying XML/XSL files
for that style and enters what it's told by those files to select for content for the currently chosen C&B-Style and the order it is
to arrange these in. For the bibliography it also applies on top of the Bibliography paragraph style any direct formatting needed
for
italics, bold, underline and note reference/numbering.

[Word does not appear to include a 'Citation' style out of the box for inserting individual Citations.]

Ideally, it would seem, prior to submitting a final paper, using the ability of the Works Cited and Bibliography content control
entries, to convert to static text (so it doesn't get changed by reviewers). Once it's static text you can certainly reapply a
different paragraph style, but would have to be careful to not undo the direct formatting applied as described above.

Joonhwan Lee has a tool that works, so far, only on the mac last time I looked, that allows you to drag and drop source entries
from BibTex onto the widget and it converts them to Word:mac 2008 sources. It is available at
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~joonhwan/personal.html
Word 2007 is supposed to have a similar ability that allows sources to be copied over using the reference pane, but that has to be
implemented by the provider of the content, as I understand it, and so far I haven't run across a research pane source that does
this. There are other 3rd party tools becoming available to convert from/to Word 2007 sources.

For issues where the underlying content fields or layout are considered to be wrong/missing etc (including 'where is Harvard
Referencing Style' g) that would probably best be discussed separately from the visual formatting. From what I gather, in
addition to two Microsoft articles on modifying the underlying XML/XSL files, Joonhwan may be working on tools to do that as well.

================
"Aliera2" wrote in message ...
THank you so much for your quick reply.

I had tried to move the arrows, but was moving the wrong one, so your advice was helpful, thank you. I know other documentation
styles have similar formats, but I only have to worry about the Chicago/Turabian for now.

Is there any way to totally customize the Reference Groups default settings?

I still don't understand why footnote reference entries aren't added to the bibliography. There's no way to customize the Reference
group settings? Microsoft's formatting of the bibliography/works cited pages is erroneous in silly ways. For example, I can only
imagine submitting a paper to my professor for review that had a bold, blue "Works Cited" title. Luckily, that actually was easy to
fix.

The references group still has so many limitations, I just really wish
Microsoft had included in their 2007 version all the features offered by the StyleEase or Endnote programs. It's well within their
capabilities to have done so. If the Office Suite had only cost me around $40 I wouldn't be so demanding, but since I had to spend
$150 on it, I have higher expectations.
--

Bob Buckland ?:-)
MS Office System Products MVP

*Courtesy is not expensive and can pay big dividends*