Thank you all for your inputs - I'm slightly star-struck by everyone who has responded, as I've read a lot of your websites at length and learnt so much from you, which I thank you for. Without you all graciously divulging your knowledge, I would still only be using 20% of Word.
It is good to know that my thought processes, in terms of the pros and cons of CC vs StyleRef were on the right track. I've gone back to the drawing board for the headers and have tested assigning custom Document Properties to the Content Controls on the cover sheet, which pull the relevant info into the header. This has worked okay so far and it has the second benefit of recording those pertinent details in the Properties.
I will test how well this would work with pulling the details into the body of the document, along with testing out the Ref field (as I can use switches to change the case, where needed). Failing that, I think I will stick to using mapped CCs in the body. If I add an additional CC in (to account for long addresses), then group all address lines and set the group to 'cannot be deleted'. I could then enable individual CCs in that group to be deleted, to give the user some control. As I've changed the placeholder text to a bright colour, any extra controls that need to be deleted before printing would be pretty obvious.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmayor
Mapped controls will work fine for any fields that you want to duplicate. Uncompleted fields will however be a problem if there are to be no macros, and if you are going to use macros to address the missing field data, you don't need to map the fields, you can instead use entry and exit macros and write the required values to a single text control.
|
Graham my knowledge of macros isn't great (next thing to learn on the long wish list). I assume this is similar to the entry/exit feature for legacy fields, except that the document has to be saved as a macro-enabled document?
Thank you all once again - you've all really helped me to get a better understanding.