Makes sense. That is, what you describe reasonably explains the discrepancy.
It doesn't explain the reason for the discrepancy. <g>
--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
"Eric" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:670C7BFB-5DEB-4071-8911-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Yes, the count is with spaces.
>
> It occurred to me that it might relate to whether the deleted text was
> counted.
>
> I did a test on Word for Windows 2003, showing Final vs. Final Showing
> Markup. I got the same thing (71K characters including spaces). I accepted
> all changes and got the same number: 71K.
>
> But then did a copy and paste (Paste Special - Unformatted Text) into
> another document, which includes both the new text and the deleted text.
> That
> showed me the 112K number, which is what the reviewer using Word for Mac
> 2004
> reported.
>
> That answers the question as to where the difference comes from. Of
> course,
> it doesn't answer the question why the character count functionality would
> be
> designed to work differently on Word for Windows 2003 and Word for Mac
> 2004.
>
> On the WORD-PC list, someone wrote "And I have noticed major differences
> between Word 2003 and 2007. I had to wrestle with this last fall. I didn't
> have time to report the problem on list--but I did note it."
>
> Word is full of unpleasant surprises!
>
>
>
>
>
> "Suzanne S. Barnhill" wrote:
>
>> Is everybody agreed on whether the count is with or without spaces?
>>
>> --
>> Suzanne S. Barnhill
>> Microsoft MVP (Word)
>> Words into Type
>> Fairhope, Alabama USA
>>
>> "Eric" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:45ED5EEF-E9A7-4BA8-9688-(E-Mail Removed)...
>> > I'm working on a document that's being reviewed and revised by multiple
>> > people.
>> >
>> > One of the reviewers has done a character count on Word for Mac 2004,
>> > getting 112K characters. I've done a count on Word for Windows 2003,
>> > getting
>> > 71K.
>> >
>> > Any idea why there's a difference?
>> >
>> > Thanks.
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
|