[Peter T. Daniels]

I think I once figured out a way to fool Word into removing a footnote
number from the sequence when a footnote is deleted with Track Changes
on, while retaining the crossed-out footnote -- so that all subsequent
foonotes would be properly numbered. (With "View Final," there's
simply a missing footnote number, and that is likely to trouble an
author who comes across it!)

But now I can't reproduce it. Any ideas?

[Stefan Blom[_3_]]

Maybe you deleted the *text* of the footnote, leaving the reference
number (in the footnote area as well as in the text) intact?

Stefan Blom
Microsoft Word MVP




On 2012-08-30 16:04, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
I think I once figured out a way to fool Word into removing a footnote
number from the sequence when a footnote is deleted with Track Changes
on, while retaining the crossed-out footnote -- so that all subsequent
foonotes would be properly numbered. (With "View Final," there's
simply a missing footnote number, and that is likely to trouble an
author who comes across it!)

But now I can't reproduce it. Any ideas?

[Peter T. Daniels]

That wouldn't work, because then there'd be an empty footnote that
would be even more obvious to the author! (And the subsequent numbers
wouldn't adjust anyway.)

It had something to do with when Track Changes was on and when it was
off in the cutting-and-pasting. (If I delete n. 8, I should see a
deleted n. 8, but then the next note should be numbered 8. Hmm, maybe
there's a way to convert a footnote reference to static text?)

On Aug 30, 10:22*am, Stefan Blom
wrote:
Maybe you deleted the *text* of the footnote, leaving the reference
number (in the footnote area as well as in the text) intact?

Stefan Blom
Microsoft Word MVP

On 2012-08-30 16:04, Peter T. Daniels wrote:



I think I once figured out a way to fool Word into removing a footnote
number from the sequence when a footnote is deleted with Track Changes
on, while retaining the crossed-out footnote -- so that all subsequent
foonotes would be properly numbered. (With "View Final," there's
simply a missing footnote number, and that is likely to trouble an
author who comes across it!)

But now I can't reproduce it. Any ideas?-

[Stefan Blom[_3_]]

Sorry, I thought that was what you wanted: a sequence of numbers left intact.

--
Stefan Blom
Microsoft Word MVP




"Peter T. Daniels" wrote in message
...

That wouldn't work, because then there'd be an empty footnote that
would be even more obvious to the author! (And the subsequent numbers
wouldn't adjust anyway.)

It had something to do with when Track Changes was on and when it was
off in the cutting-and-pasting. (If I delete n. 8, I should see a
deleted n. 8, but then the next note should be numbered 8. Hmm, maybe
there's a way to convert a footnote reference to static text?)

On Aug 30, 10:22 am, Stefan Blom
wrote:
Maybe you deleted the *text* of the footnote, leaving the reference
number (in the footnote area as well as in the text) intact?

Stefan Blom
Microsoft Word MVP

On 2012-08-30 16:04, Peter T. Daniels wrote:



I think I once figured out a way to fool Word into removing a footnote
number from the sequence when a footnote is deleted with Track Changes
on, while retaining the crossed-out footnote -- so that all subsequent
foonotes would be properly numbered. (With "View Final," there's
simply a missing footnote number, and that is likely to trouble an
author who comes across it!)

But now I can't reproduce it. Any ideas?-