TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:RE: MS Word Master Document From:"Tieberg, Ellen" <Ellen -dot- Tieberg -at- den -dot- galileo -dot- com> To:"'@m'" <sdeichmann -at- voicemobility -dot- com>, TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Wed, 15 Mar 2000 11:28:42 -0700
I had to develop two 220-page docs with 256-color bitmaps for a project
several years ago. At the time, Word 95 was available (and the only feasible
option), so I added in 70 MGs of linked graphics. It did work, although it
was not particularly stable. Links would disappear for no particular reason,
even if the user downloaded the entire document folder and didn't mess with
the relative links to the graphics. Links would even disappear from my
original doc for no reason. So, it worked -- but not comfortably. I have no
idea whether 97 or 2000 handle that many linked graphics in a more stable
way than Word 95.
When I updated the documents to Word 97, I found that the new feature for
reducing bitmap sizes pretty much solved my problems. When embedded in the
Word 97 doc, my 70 MGs of linked graphics reduced down to create a 4 MG Word
doc -- still a clunky size, but it did the trick. And I haven't had an other
difficulties maintaing the doc at that size.
Ellen
-----Original Message-----
From: @m [mailto:sdeichmann -at- voicemobility -dot- com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2000 10:08 AM
To: TECHWR-L
Subject: Re: MS Word Master Document
I have had lots of problems in the past with Word's master document feature,
and abandoned it about 4 years ago. I have not used it in Word 97 or Word
2000, so I cannot comment on whether MS has improved it.
I have worked with 250+ page documents in Word 97 and Word 2000 with much
success. The graphics were even embedded in the document, not linked. I
recommend converting it to a single doc.
Sue
Andriene Ferguson <Andriene -dot- Ferguson -at- concisetech -dot- com> wrote in message news:40127 -at- techwr-l -dot- -dot- -dot-
>
> I have a 300 page manual to update. The manual was created in MS Word as a
> Master doc. I am trying to decide whether to keep it as a master doc or to
> convert it to one word doc. I know Word does not handle large documents
> well, but if I link all the graphics I think it should be okay. I have
never
> worked with Word's master doc feature, but I have heard horrible things
> about it.
>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Sponsored by Weisner Associates Inc., Online Information Services
Training & consulting for RoboHELP, Dreamweaver, HTML, and HTML-Based Help.
More info at http://www.weisner.com/train/ or mailto:training -at- weisner -dot- com -dot-
Your web site in 32 languages? Maybe not now, but sooner than you think.
Contact ForeignExchange for the FREE paper, "3 steps to successful
translation management" (http://www.fxtrans.com/3steps.html?tw).
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: ellen -dot- tieberg -at- den -dot- galileo -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-30716D -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
