TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2003-01 > 1041894465


From: "Cheri Casper" <>
Subject: RE: [TMG] unique endnotes
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 15:08:11 -0800
In-Reply-To: <3E19D52F.68FC4948@post.harvard.edu>


Seth - How does your macro work when split CDs are used?

CheriC

-----Original Message-----
From: Seth Kosowsky [mailto:]
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 11:13 AM
To:
Subject: RE: [TMG] unique endnotes


>example). However, I believe there is a macro that will convert
footnotes
>to unique endnotes and that it is available on Lee's website. Can
anyone
>detail the pros and cons of using TMG's unique features versus using
this
>macro to convert after the fact (other than you would be able to edit
those
>footnotes in a word processor before the conversion).


I'm no expert in MS Word's inner workings, but ... I'm familiar with 3
types of notes in MS Word - endnotes, footnotes, and cross references.

Footnotes and endnotes are the text / citations appearing below the page
or at the end of the document. They cannot cross -reference another
note, so you cannot for example have a real footnote #3 on page one and
then another real footnote#3 later somehow refer back to that note on
page one.

You CAN have a cross-reference note do this. It looks like a foot/end
note, acts like one... etc. And in this way, the macros can give a
really good approximation to idealized unique endnotes / footnotes. The
first note for a source is a real footnote; subsequent notes are really
cross-reference notes, referring to that footnote.

I have worked only briefly with the TMG unique notes. They seemed to be
essentially text. That is, the superscript number indicators, the text
at the end, etc., all of it is straight text. There is none of the
intelligence that MS Word (and other processors) use in that text -
styles / formats, etc.

The disadvantages to the cross-ref scheme are:
---- the first citation of a source is a real footnote. If you delete
that footnote, the cross-references to that particular footnote are
confused, since you removed what they pointed to. So basically you can't
delete (can edit though) the first reference to a source.
Cross-reference notes can be deleted with impunity.

Some advantages:
--- No ibids, duplicates - In my full output, I have @4700 references,
and they reduce to 1100 with the macros. That saves me a lot of paper.

--- The intelligence of the document remains-- add a footnote later,
change the style / format of the notes later, convert from endnotes to
footnotes later, cursor over the note number shows the note text, etc.

--- Until you run the macros, the foot/end notes are real. So for
example, I can cut and paste a section from a large narrative report,
and make a small branch report with real notes (MS Word is intelligent
enough to bring along the notes when you cut and paste text). Then I can
convert those notes to unique endnotes, etc. (Sometimes it is quicker
than generating a new report - like when I don't have my TMG computer
with me :-) ).

Basically the macros / unique endnotes are pretty much what you think
they are. I recommend trying them. The macros only affect the particular
Word document, and only when you run them. They don't touch the TMGW
database in any way, and they don't change you system, etc. And if you
don't like the result, just hit the UNDO button in MS Word.

Feel free to ask about them and/or make suggestions about them.

-Seth








==== TMG Mailing List ====
To un-subscribe from TMG-L (mail mode), send a message to
<> with just the word "unsubscribe" (no quotes)in
the text and turn off your signature.


This thread: