mabarnes11
asked on
Changing page number format in Table of Contents for Word 2010
I have been fighting the table of contents in a Word document I created. The TOC page numbers keeps coming up in the i, ii, iii. The pages are numbered 1,2,3. One key may be the body of the document is in a different section of the document. I have Section one which is a forward and the TOC and then Section 2 which is the rest of the 20 plus pages.
I would like the TOC to show the pages in teh 1,2,3 format and not i, ii, iii.
Thanks in advance...
Marvin
I would like the TOC to show the pages in teh 1,2,3 format and not i, ii, iii.
Thanks in advance...
Marvin
Hi there. A pretty good site with printscreens:
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/10things/10-steps-to-creating-a-numbered-heading-style-in-word/1432.
Success.
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/10things/10-steps-to-creating-a-numbered-heading-style-in-word/1432.
Success.
ASKER
I found the answer in the formatting of the section which neither had suggested.
ASKER
I've requested that this question be closed as follows:
Accepted answer: 0 points for mabarnes11's comment http:/Q_27399617.html#36978747
for the following reason:
No points issued
Accepted answer: 0 points for mabarnes11's comment http:/Q_27399617.html#36978747
for the following reason:
No points issued
Can you explain what the answer was, please?
We haven't been told what the answer was.
We haven't been told what the answer was.
ASKER
Sorry but I have been totally consumed by other work. I am still not free from the project which prompted my question. I guess you and Expert's Exchange wants points and money and don't care about the people who are paying. The solution is in the section properties and how the numbering in that section is set up. The page number s of the section you have in the contents does not drive the formatting. The section the contents is in drives the numbering hence you cannot have both i, ii, iii and 1, 2, 3 in the same table of contents.
Good enough or do you need more?
Good enough or do you need more?
ASKER
I've requested that this question be closed as follows:
Accepted answer: 0 points for mabarnes11's comment http:/Q_27399617.html#36978747
for the following reason:
I found my own.
Accepted answer: 0 points for mabarnes11's comment http:/Q_27399617.html#36978747
for the following reason:
I found my own.
"hence you cannot have both i, ii, iii and 1, 2, 3 in the same table of contents"
This is not true at all. When building a ToC, Word uses the numbering defined within a section by the Page Number Format dialog (and inherited by subsequent sections). Books commonlyu have i, ii, iii... style numbering for front-end pages, then switch to 1, 2, 3... style for the main body -- and Word can easily handle this. In your case, you want the opposite (i.e. a page numbered "i" to appear in the ToC as "1") which is quite non-standard, and not surprisingly, Word is not designed to do it that way.
There are probably workarounds, but I suspect the tone of your last comment will make it unlikely that EE volunteers will be very inclined to spend any more time on this for you.
EE is valuable because users can see answers to questions asked -- even those apparently resolved by the OP. In this case, your "solution" is not correct. I am objecting to the request to close this because the answer is misleading.
ASKER
So what would you like me to do, not pay my annual fee to EE next time?
With all due respect, I found a solution to the problem at hand and was happy with EE until you jumped in objecting.
What i duscovered worked for what I needed.
Is it you want me to award the points to you?
Sorry but I don't understand all if this huffing and puffing Genius.
With all due respect, I found a solution to the problem at hand and was happy with EE until you jumped in objecting.
What i duscovered worked for what I needed.
Is it you want me to award the points to you?
Sorry but I don't understand all if this huffing and puffing Genius.
Finding your own solution is fine mabarnes11, and it makes no difference to me if you choose to close a question without sharing the answer. However, a wrong or misleading solution to a question can become a problem for subsequent viewers. EE includes the objection option in order to allow further clarification, and to improve the value of the topic threads. My comment was intended to provide such clarification, and I had no expectation of points.
Not sure where the "huffing and puffing" part comes in... ;-)
Not sure where the "huffing and puffing" part comes in... ;-)
ASKER
I've requested that this question be deleted for the following reason:
Tired of the hassle from all the "Experts". I gave my solution that worked for me and was told that my solution that solved my problem was not acceptable.<br />Please try and remember as as the customer I was satisfied until the Genius and other Experts stepped in and started telling me I was wrong and my solution that worked for me was wrong.
Tired of the hassle from all the "Experts". I gave my solution that worked for me and was told that my solution that solved my problem was not acceptable.<br />Please try and remember as as the customer I was satisfied until the Genius and other Experts stepped in and started telling me I was wrong and my solution that worked for me was wrong.
I am not going to formally object again, but I do agree with Eric.
FYI if you pay to use this service, you are actually paying for the server and application, not for our time and effort. Almost all contributors that you are likely to interact with are unpaid volunteers, most of whom are concerned with adding to the knowledge pool. That is why we objected.
If we can't persuade you that your given answer is plainly wrong, then deletion is the best solution.
FYI if you pay to use this service, you are actually paying for the server and application, not for our time and effort. Almost all contributors that you are likely to interact with are unpaid volunteers, most of whom are concerned with adding to the knowledge pool. That is why we objected.
If we can't persuade you that your given answer is plainly wrong, then deletion is the best solution.
ASKER
So help me understand. The solution I came up with solved my problem. Why is that so wrong with all you "experts?" We who rely on you really don't expect such a turmoil because we find something that works for us. The many corporations I have recommended EE to may have to know they need to go along or the EE experts or they will face the same I am facing.
Let's get the story straight here. The answer given by the expert did not work. The numbering in section 1 was i, ii, iii. In section two the numbering was 1,2,3. The TOC was in section 1 and when the TOC was formed the section went to the page numbering of the section it was in. The only way to change the numbering of the TOC was to change the format of the page numbering in section one to the same undesirable format of section 2.
Never once as "assumed" by the expert did I want any page numbered as 1 to appear as i. I only wish the expert would have clarified instead of incorrectly stating the case. I wanted section 2 (1,2,3) to appear as 1,2,3 and section 1 to appear as i, ii,iii. Instead it appeared as i,ii,iii because that was the format of the section the TOC was created in which was i, ii, iii. The solution given by EricFletcher does not work because he failed to read the question and clarify before he assumed. I chose not to engage him and tell him he failed to understand the problem and I solved the problem at hand with my so ill conceived solution that worked in the case I had at hand so I tried to leave it alone. Please explain to me why I have to listen to a solution that did not understand the problem I had and the solution I came up with worked and I will go away with all my the folks I have recommended EE to.
Please reread my original question and you will see I never once asked for what EricFletcher stated I wanted. I wanted the intro pages to be i, ii, iii and the remainder of the document which was in another section to be 1,2,3 as they were numbered. I did not want any page numbering changed only the presentation int the TOC.
Let's get the story straight here. The answer given by the expert did not work. The numbering in section 1 was i, ii, iii. In section two the numbering was 1,2,3. The TOC was in section 1 and when the TOC was formed the section went to the page numbering of the section it was in. The only way to change the numbering of the TOC was to change the format of the page numbering in section one to the same undesirable format of section 2.
Never once as "assumed" by the expert did I want any page numbered as 1 to appear as i. I only wish the expert would have clarified instead of incorrectly stating the case. I wanted section 2 (1,2,3) to appear as 1,2,3 and section 1 to appear as i, ii,iii. Instead it appeared as i,ii,iii because that was the format of the section the TOC was created in which was i, ii, iii. The solution given by EricFletcher does not work because he failed to read the question and clarify before he assumed. I chose not to engage him and tell him he failed to understand the problem and I solved the problem at hand with my so ill conceived solution that worked in the case I had at hand so I tried to leave it alone. Please explain to me why I have to listen to a solution that did not understand the problem I had and the solution I came up with worked and I will go away with all my the folks I have recommended EE to.
Please reread my original question and you will see I never once asked for what EricFletcher stated I wanted. I wanted the intro pages to be i, ii, iii and the remainder of the document which was in another section to be 1,2,3 as they were numbered. I did not want any page numbering changed only the presentation int the TOC.
ASKER
And Mr. Fletcher's comment: "I suspect the tone of your last comment will make it unlikely that EE volunteers will be very inclined to spend any more time on this for you" is silly. I already had a solution so why would I want anyone to work on it any further?
There could be some confusion with what you meant in your original question. It very much looked to me that you wanted Arabic numbering for TOC, while you were using lower-case Roman numbering for the page number formatting.
You did say that you have Section 1 as a forward (did you mean foreword?), but it wasn't clear how relevant that was.
For this reason, I said that the TOC numbering was the same as the Section numbering. I think that that knowledge should have answered your question, whatever your actual set-up was.
You have, in the penultimate sentence of your last comment, given a clearer picture of what you were trying to do and I think that we are actually in agreement as to what the actual solution is, in that you agree with what I said in my first comment.
From your comment #37000170:
"The solution is in the section properties and how the numbering in that section is set up."
Yes, that is, in other words, what I said.
"The section the contents is in drives the numbering hence you cannot have both i, ii, iii and 1, 2, 3 in the same table of contents."
First clause: "The section the contents is in drives the numbering" could be a restatement of the previous sentence and is agreed, but the second clause "hence you cannot have both i, ii, iii and 1, 2, 3 in the same table of contents" is what we claim is plain wrong.
You did say that you have Section 1 as a forward (did you mean foreword?), but it wasn't clear how relevant that was.
For this reason, I said that the TOC numbering was the same as the Section numbering. I think that that knowledge should have answered your question, whatever your actual set-up was.
You have, in the penultimate sentence of your last comment, given a clearer picture of what you were trying to do and I think that we are actually in agreement as to what the actual solution is, in that you agree with what I said in my first comment.
From your comment #37000170:
"The solution is in the section properties and how the numbering in that section is set up."
Yes, that is, in other words, what I said.
"The section the contents is in drives the numbering hence you cannot have both i, ii, iii and 1, 2, 3 in the same table of contents."
First clause: "The section the contents is in drives the numbering" could be a restatement of the previous sentence and is agreed, but the second clause "hence you cannot have both i, ii, iii and 1, 2, 3 in the same table of contents" is what we claim is plain wrong.
ASKER
I hear what you are saying but here is the rub. I called MS Office Support prior to putting this question up. I gave up on them as they could not make it work either. My only question left to you is this, have you actually built a 23 page document and tried to duplicate what I am doing? Two sections and section 1 the pages are numbered one way and section 2 the other? If you haven't, do it and tell me the steps you use to get two different page numbering schemes in the same section of the TOC. So far every one of you have said it could be done but NO ONE has told me how it can be done. MS support couldn't tell me either.
Please build it and tell me how to change the page numbering other than to do it manually i.e. I enter the heading titles and the page numbers without letting MS Word build it for you.
The real learning here might be for y'all to listen to us when we tell you something. We don't have your intelligence/expertise or we would not be asking. As part of your expertise yous share you may need to help us help you understand what we are trying to do. Of course that may not be in the purview of EE. I don't know.
Try to build this thing and please let me know the steps to change the numbers in the TOC as I asked to do. I will change my document and use your expertize.
Thanks...
Please build it and tell me how to change the page numbering other than to do it manually i.e. I enter the heading titles and the page numbers without letting MS Word build it for you.
The real learning here might be for y'all to listen to us when we tell you something. We don't have your intelligence/expertise or we would not be asking. As part of your expertise yous share you may need to help us help you understand what we are trying to do. Of course that may not be in the purview of EE. I don't know.
Try to build this thing and please let me know the steps to change the numbers in the TOC as I asked to do. I will change my document and use your expertize.
Thanks...
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
You have finally answered my original question that came from 20 exchanges. Thank you.
I slightly disagree with your last paragraph. I think this illustrates what all "Experts" should strive to do and that is to fully understand the question before they head down a path. You are the only person in this whole list of exchanges that explained how to do it. Good on YOU!!!
Unfortunately for me I don't have expertise in any one area that allow me to make points to not pay the money I spend each year.
Thanks for understanding.
I slightly disagree with your last paragraph. I think this illustrates what all "Experts" should strive to do and that is to fully understand the question before they head down a path. You are the only person in this whole list of exchanges that explained how to do it. Good on YOU!!!
Unfortunately for me I don't have expertise in any one area that allow me to make points to not pay the money I spend each year.
Thanks for understanding.
ASKER
EricFletcher actually provided a solution. I wish to award point to him.
ASKER
A real expert.
As a last step in the creation of the document, you could change the numbering style to what you want in the TOC, update the TOC, then change it back again.
Mind you, if I had to read such a document, I would find it very confusing.