reports to MS Word

[Bob Greiner 0]

I am in the process of generating a book from multiple TMG reports. My desire is to print them to MS Word, where I can reformat, etc. There are a few problems that I cannot seem to find a solution for. The first is to generate endnotes in the document with true MS Word codes, so that the document can be modified and the endnote numbering automatically changed. In an article that Terry Reigel wrote, he said:

 

"TMG provides output directly in the file formats of many word processors. I find this extremely handy. Because the documents are in the native format of the word processor, with source notes and index codes embedded in the word processor's formats, any editing I may do is automatically managed by the word processor's tools. If I delete text with a note attached, the note also disappears, and the remaining notes are renumbered. "

 

Is this true for MS Word? I find that the index codes are embedded in the document, but not endnotes. Thus, I cannot add or delete endnotes and have the numbering automatically change. Are there other word processors with which this works?

 

Secondly, I would like to generate several individual reports with endnotes. I would like to accumulate these endnotes across the several reports, with consecutive numbering throughout the reports, with one endnote section at the end. When I tried to use the book report to do that, with output going to MS Word, the endnotes are printed with each report.

 

Thirdly, is there a way to generate a journal report that begins with the progenitor, person 1, then sorts the output so that there is a separate section (chapter) for each of the progenitor's children. I would like to keep the numbering consistent, similar to a normal journal report. I would also like the back references of descendants to reach all the way back to the progenitor. Running separate reports for each child of person 1 results in something close to what I desire, except that the numbering is repeated (although that could be adjusted for each report) and the back references only reach to the child of person 1. (And of course I am getting multiple sets of endnotes.) I realize that this is not a "standard" numbering scheme.

 

I would appreciate any suggestions.

Thanks,

Bob Greiner

[Terry Reigel 0]

I am in the process of generating a book from multiple TMG reports. My desire is to print them to MS Word, where I can reformat, etc. There are a few problems that I cannot seem to find a solution for. The first is to generate endnotes in the document with true MS Word codes, so that the document can be modified and the endnote numbering automatically changed.

If you are not getting "true" endnotes to Word, I'd guess you are using the "Unique" endnotes feature. It generates plain text notes rather than true note codes.

Secondly, I would like to generate several individual reports with endnotes. I would like to accumulate these endnotes across the several reports, with consecutive numbering throughout the reports, with one endnote section at the end.

As long as you don't use the Unique Endnotes feature, you will get the notes in Word's format. If you then combine the documents in Word, Word will re-number them automatically to a single set of numbers, with all the notes at the end.

Thirdly, is there a way to generate a journal report that begins with the progenitor, person 1, then sorts the output so that there is a separate section (chapter) for each of the progenitor's children. I would like to keep the numbering consistent, similar to a normal journal report. I would also like the back references of descendants to reach all the way back to the progenitor.

If I'm understanding correctly, you want the numbering to look like each child of the progenitor is the head of a separate report, but the back references to act like it's a single report. Is that it? No, TMG won't do that - you have to either make it a single report, or separate reports, not half and half, I'm afraid.

 

You could achieve it with lots of manual editing in Word, but it would be a lot of work.

[Bob Greiner 0]

Thanks for the quick response Terry. I tried that and it worked fine, except for the excessive number of footnotes. But I'll read through more of your suggestions to see if I can fix that. Note that I had to remove the Unique check box from both Sources and Memos before the "real" endnotes were exported to MS Word.

 

Bob Greiner