Word 2003 in Windows XP -- For my document, no graphics, I am at 575 KB and
51 pages, with more to come. I have read enough to know that Master
Documents are to be avoided because they corrupt so easily. The major
headings (continuous sections) are 10 with subheadings, all of which the
author wants in one document and a TOC (probably 2 pages worth). Am I asking
for trouble here? Should I consider asking for intallation of FrameMaker?
(smile)

Word has been known to handle documents up to 10,000 pages in a single file,
assuming sufficient power/RAM in the computer.

You should be fine. The max is (or was) 32MB, but that referred to text
only, and did not include graphics. 32MB of text is a whole lot.

Why do you have continuous section breaks between major subheadings?


On 5/19/05 3:04 PM, "LindaNorcross" wrote:

Word 2003 in Windows XP -- For my document, no graphics, I am at 575 KB and
51 pages, with more to come. I have read enough to know that Master
Documents are to be avoided because they corrupt so easily. The major
headings (continuous sections) are 10 with subheadings, all of which the
author wants in one document and a TOC (probably 2 pages worth). Am I asking
for trouble here? Should I consider asking for intallation of FrameMaker?
(smile)



--
Daiya Mitchell, MVP Mac/Word
Word FAQ: http://www.word.mvps.org/
MacWord Tips: http://www.word.mvps.org/MacWordNew/
What's an MVP? A volunteer! Read the FAQ: http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/

That's a tiny document.



"LindaNorcross" wrote in message
...
Word 2003 in Windows XP -- For my document, no graphics, I am at 575 KB
and 51 pages, with more to come. I have read enough to know that Master
Documents are to be avoided because they corrupt so easily. The major
headings (continuous sections) are 10 with subheadings, all of which the
author wants in one document and a TOC (probably 2 pages worth). Am I
asking for trouble here? Should I consider asking for intallation of
FrameMaker? (smile)

I just finished working on a 47 meg document. It exceeded 10,000
pages. I worked with it carefully and patiently, saving and backing
up, to find/replace and do formatting. Once I got that done, I saved
it into sepearate documents, one for each volume. None is more than 8
megs, and now the true editing is going along swimmingly.

*(((({


In the last exciting episode on Thu, 19 May 2005 15:23:47 -0700, Daiya
Mitchell wrote:

|Word has been known to handle documents up to 10,000 pages in a single file,
|assuming sufficient power/RAM in the computer.
|
|You should be fine. The max is (or was) 32MB, but that referred to text
|only, and did not include graphics. 32MB of text is a whole lot.
|
|Why do you have continuous section breaks between major subheadings?
|
|
|On 5/19/05 3:04 PM, "LindaNorcross" wrote:
|
| Word 2003 in Windows XP -- For my document, no graphics, I am at 575 KB and
| 51 pages, with more to come. I have read enough to know that Master
| Documents are to be avoided because they corrupt so easily. The major
| headings (continuous sections) are 10 with subheadings, all of which the
| author wants in one document and a TOC (probably 2 pages worth). Am I asking
| for trouble here? Should I consider asking for intallation of FrameMaker?
| (smile)
|
|

Apparently Word 2003 Help no longer has the info that the max size is
32MB--whether this is because there is no longer a max, or just part of the
general downgrade of Help in Office 2003, I don't know.

Was your 47MB document all text? That didn't include any graphics? And
which version were you using?

Good to know if the limits are higher--for the few people who will take
advantage of that.


On 5/24/05 8:59 AM, "*((({" wrote:

I just finished working on a 47 meg document. It exceeded 10,000
pages. I worked with it carefully and patiently, saving and backing
up, to find/replace and do formatting. Once I got that done, I saved
it into sepearate documents, one for each volume. None is more than 8
megs, and now the true editing is going along swimmingly.



|Word has been known to handle documents up to 10,000 pages in a single file,
|assuming sufficient power/RAM in the computer.
|
|You should be fine. The max is (or was) 32MB, but that referred to text
|only, and did not include graphics. 32MB of text is a whole lot.
|

Using Word 2000. It was all text. But it was a close call -- had to
close the document after 3-5 find/replace operations. And some
find/replace took 5+ minutes. Time for me to get a cup of tea. I
have 512 Megs of Ram, and a Pentium IV.

*(((({




In the last exciting episode on Tue, 24 May 2005 09:34:41 -0700, Daiya
Mitchell wrote:

|Apparently Word 2003 Help no longer has the info that the max size is
|32MB--whether this is because there is no longer a max, or just part of the
|general downgrade of Help in Office 2003, I don't know.
|
|Was your 47MB document all text? That didn't include any graphics? And
|which version were you using?
|
|Good to know if the limits are higher--for the few people who will take
|advantage of that.
|
|
|On 5/24/05 8:59 AM, "*((({" wrote:
|
| I just finished working on a 47 meg document. It exceeded 10,000
| pages. I worked with it carefully and patiently, saving and backing
| up, to find/replace and do formatting. Once I got that done, I saved
| it into sepearate documents, one for each volume. None is more than 8
| megs, and now the true editing is going along swimmingly.
|
|
|
| |Word has been known to handle documents up to 10,000 pages in a single file,
| |assuming sufficient power/RAM in the computer.
| |
| |You should be fine. The max is (or was) 32MB, but that referred to text
| |only, and did not include graphics. 32MB of text is a whole lot.
| |

Interesting, thanks.
DM


On 5/25/05 12:42 PM, "*((({" wrote:

Using Word 2000. It was all text. But it was a close call -- had to
close the document after 3-5 find/replace operations. And some
find/replace took 5+ minutes. Time for me to get a cup of tea. I
have 512 Megs of Ram, and a Pentium IV.

*(((({




In the last exciting episode on Tue, 24 May 2005 09:34:41 -0700, Daiya
Mitchell wrote:

|Apparently Word 2003 Help no longer has the info that the max size is
|32MB--whether this is because there is no longer a max, or just part of the
|general downgrade of Help in Office 2003, I don't know.
|
|Was your 47MB document all text? That didn't include any graphics? And
|which version were you using?
|
|Good to know if the limits are higher--for the few people who will take
|advantage of that.
|
|
|On 5/24/05 8:59 AM, "*((({" wrote:
|
| I just finished working on a 47 meg document. It exceeded 10,000
| pages. I worked with it carefully and patiently, saving and backing
| up, to find/replace and do formatting. Once I got that done, I saved
| it into sepearate documents, one for each volume. None is more than 8
| megs, and now the true editing is going along swimmingly.
|
|
|
| |Word has been known to handle documents up to 10,000 pages in a single
file,
| |assuming sufficient power/RAM in the computer.
| |
| |You should be fine. The max is (or was) 32MB, but that referred to text
| |only, and did not include graphics. 32MB of text is a whole lot.
| |

*((({ wrote:
Using Word 2000. It was all text. But it was a close call -- had to
close the document after 3-5 find/replace operations. And some
find/replace took 5+ minutes. Time for me to get a cup of tea. I
have 512 Megs of Ram, and a Pentium IV.

And you are positive that there were no other objects of any sort in
there? Holy Guacamole, 47 MByte of Text is a lot of Harry Potter books!!

It would be worth finding out which of the limitations of the article
below are history nowadays, and which are still in force. As Daiya
mentioned, the fact that it's not anymore in Help or at the MSFT
homepage doesn't really tell us a lot ... :-(

WD2000: Operating Parameter Limitations and Specifications
http://support.microsoft.com/default...;en-us;Q211489

Greetinx
Robert
PS: 512 MByte RAM is surely on the lower end for such a document ...
--
/"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign | MS
\ / | MVP
X Against HTML | for
/ \ in e-mail & news | Word

Yeppers. All text. 17 volumes worth. :-)

*(((({


In the last exciting episode on Thu, 26 May 2005 10:49:37 +0200,
"Robert M. Franz (RMF)" wrote:

|*((({ wrote:
| Using Word 2000. It was all text. But it was a close call -- had to
| close the document after 3-5 find/replace operations. And some
| find/replace took 5+ minutes. Time for me to get a cup of tea. I
| have 512 Megs of Ram, and a Pentium IV.
|
|And you are positive that there were no other objects of any sort in
|there? Holy Guacamole, 47 MByte of Text is a lot of Harry Potter books!!
|
|It would be worth finding out which of the limitations of the article
|below are history nowadays, and which are still in force. As Daiya
|mentioned, the fact that it's not anymore in Help or at the MSFT
|homepage doesn't really tell us a lot ... :-(
|
|WD2000: Operating Parameter Limitations and Specifications
|http://support.microsoft.com/default...;en-us;Q211489
|
|Greetinx
|Robert
|PS: 512 MByte RAM is surely on the lower end for such a document ...

What did you learn? I have a doc at 35MB and climbing I must be in
trouble....