Replies

Thanks for this guidance – I shall study those posts.

At the moment I am reduced to writing down on a piece of paper my account details, then filling in the tools>account dialog box each time. (shades of Spike Milligan). This is the worst of all worlds. I would have thought this would be a popular option, especially in these mobile times.

I will report back with any progress

Thanks for this guidance – I shall study those posts.

At the moment I am reduced to writing down on a piece of paper my account details, then filling in the tools>account dialog box each time. (shades of Spike Milligan). This is the worst of all worlds. I would have thought this would be a popular option, especially in these mobile times.

I will report back with any progress

Hello Phil

Thanks so much for the sample document – it works perfectly and shows me just how to implement the scheme!

Hello Phil

Thanks so much for the sample document – it works perfectly and shows me just how to implement the scheme!

hi Phil
Thanks for this advice. After posting my query, i did find the kb article you mention and had a go last night using seq fields. I am using w2000 and the article says word 97, and i did find that the footer part of the solution produced an error, although the header worked well. maybe the fields work differently in Word 2000?

I shall keep trying with the use of fields, and also found the earlier post of yours useful to.
thanks again
frank

hi Phil
Thanks for this advice. After posting my query, i did find the kb article you mention and had a go last night using seq fields. I am using w2000 and the article says word 97, and i did find that the footer part of the solution produced an error, although the header worked well. maybe the fields work differently in Word 2000?

I shall keep trying with the use of fields, and also found the earlier post of yours useful to.
thanks again
frank

Thank you, yes that did help.
The key was in the properties of the table rows, some of which did have boxes ticked which they should not have.
On fixing these the table began behaving.

Thanks again!

Thank you, yes that did help.
The key was in the properties of the table rows, some of which did have boxes ticked which they should not have.
On fixing these the table began behaving.

Thanks again!

The obvious answer is 11 (binary)

Also 42 (the answer to everything)

Cant think of another just yet

The obvious answer is 11 (binary)

Also 42 (the answer to everything)

Cant think of another just yet

Thank you!

This solution worked perfectly. I have set plone to port 8180, by default the zope management interface uses port 8080 (and another zope service uses port 8280 so I took a chance… ) and that leaves the localhost free for IIS. I can easily link between the two, which is what I wanted.

A bit of experimenting with the .conf files was all it took!

Thank you!

This solution worked perfectly. I have set plone to port 8180, by default the zope management interface uses port 8080 (and another zope service uses port 8280 so I took a chance… ) and that leaves the localhost free for IIS. I can easily link between the two, which is what I wanted.

A bit of experimenting with the .conf files was all it took!

A belated thankyou for all your help, I got the problem solved with it!

A belated thankyou for all your help, I got the problem solved with it!

It worked perfectly – of course I should have remembered to use an equals sign in the first place…..