Styles & Outline Numbering

[Debbie]

I have been trying to set up this numbering scheme
(attached) using styles. The required scheme is:

The first three levels are 1, 1.1 and 1.1.1

The next level is (a)

The next level they want 1.1.1.1 (i.e. four digits but
the fifth level number)

The level after that is to be (a) or (i)

The final level is 1.1.1.1.1 (i.e. five digits but the
seventh level number)

I have achieved a certain amount of success but just
cannot get the fourth level of numbering to restart after
the third level. Admittedly, the numbering scheme is a
rather strange one but I can get the sixth level to
restart correctly.

I can sort of believe it's not possible, except for the
fact that restarting the number works for level 6 and in
that case it should work for level 4.

Here's my logic as to why it wouldn't be possible:

The first three levels are fine being 1, 1.1 and 1.1.1

The next level is OK - it is (a)

However, for the next level the requirement is 1.1.1.1

The level after that is to be (a) or (i)

The final level is 1.1.1.1.1

I think the problem may be caused by the fact that there
are seven levels of numbering but that they are not
sequential in that:

One would expect 1.1.1.1 to be level 4 where in fact it
is level 5 - the system thinks it should have
another '.1' on the end of it to represent that level.
Taking one of the numbers off in the numbering mask sends
it do-lally although only sufficiently to make me think
I've gone slightly mad.

Then it changes numbering style - fine - but then the
next level suffers from the same thing. The rquirement
is to use the format 1.1.1.1.1 which Word expects to be a
fifth level number when in this scheme it is in fact a
7th level number and Word expects it to be 1.1.1.1.1.1.1

Goodnesss, I hope this makes sense to someone and I thank
whoever it is in advance for any help.

D

 

[Margaret Aldis]

Hi Debbie

I'm not sure I fully follow this, but some warning bells sounded for me when
you said

Taking one of the numbers off in the numbering mask sends
it do-lally although only sufficiently to make me think
I've gone slightly mad.

Firstly, you must set the whole numbering scheme up from the top level
style, as explained in
http://www.shaunakelly.com/word/numbering/OutlineNumbering.html. If you do
that and set up each level and linked style in order, you shouldn't need to
get into removing numbers - or if you do it will become apparent which
previous level numbers (a and i) you need to delete.

 

[Bruce Brown]

Debbie and Margaret,

This is just a hunch but it sounds as if the fourth and six levels are
meant to be like simple little independent lists sandwiched between
the legal numbering levels that shouldn't have any effect on the the
legal numbering sequence.

Certainly no one *reading* such a document would be able to figure out
why the legal numbering was being incremented by the (a)(b)(c) lists.
It makes no sense at all.

If this analysis is correct, you'd build levels 1-5 as sequential
legal numbering, then you could use any two of the built-in List
Number styles for the (a)(b)(c) lists. It's easy to modify them to
get an (a) or (i) numbering style.

Or I could be all wet and your bosses desire to hopelessly confuse
their readers. They wouldn't be the first. - Bruce

 

[Jean-Guy Marcil]

Hi Debbie,



1. Level 1

1.1. Level 2

1.2. Level 2

1.2.1. Level 3

1.2.2. Level 3

a. Level 4

b. Level 4

1.2.2.1. Level 5

a. Level 6

b. Level 6

1.2.2.1.1. Level 7

1.2.2.1.2. Level 7


If it is I can tell you how to achieve this, but it is going to take some
serious writing...
So before I do so, I would like you to confirm that I understand your
requirements.
--
Cheers!
_______________________________________
Jean-Guy Marcil - Word MVP
(e-mail address removed)
Word MVP site: http://www.word.mvps.org

 

[ChasGo]

I'm sure Jean-Guy will offer more complete info, but
here's my two cents. When building level 5,
insert "previous levels" 1, 2 and 3 [but NO 4]. Similarly,
to build level 7, insert "previous levels" 1, 2, 3, [but
NO 4], yes 5 [but NO 6]. This keeps those a's and b's from
showing up in your levels 5 & 7, but keeps them in the
scheme for use underneath levels 3 and 5. It builds what
Bruce insightfully describes, but avoids tangling with two
schemes (however simple) by keeping it all in one.

 

[Debbie]

Hi all

Thank you so much for all your help. I know styles are
truly wonderful things but I am sure they are responsible
for many an IT person being 'rested' in a darkened room.
I used Shauna Kelly's article in the end although I'm
sure some of the other suggestions for this somewhat
different scheme would also have worked.

Thanks for all the support.