I have a problem with saving equations created in the 2007 Equation Editor to
a 2003 file. My file is a 400 page doc with equations, diagrams, and portrait
& landscape pages.

Problems:
1. Saving the 2007 word file as a 2003 file causes the equations created by
the 2007 equation editor to chop off 1/3 or 1/4 of the right side of the
equation.

2. Printing to either Adobe PDF "printer" or a physical HP laser printer,
causes the 2003 equations to be grainy. Additionally, the black fonts looks
bluish in the pdf file.

3. The equations are correct and the fonts are correct if the pdf file is
generated from the 2007 Word file.

Packages:
1. I'm using the Adobe solutions from CS2. This gives me the the ability to
mix
and match pdf files.
2. Windows XP and Office 2007.

Have to keep two versions, 2007 & 2003 because of page orientation problems.
See post: Landscape pages are not faxed from Word 2007.

Ben

1. Word 2007 uses a different EE engine and back-conversion is very poor.
However, if you need full backward compatibility, you can use Insert, Object
Equation Editor 3 and it opens the legacy EE (which is the same as in Word
2003).

2. As above. Either print in Word 2007 mode or if you must use the legacy
mode, then use the legacy Equation Editor.

I know this isn't exactly what you wanted to hear, but the new EE is just
totally different from the legacy EE that when you save in legacy mode, the
equations are converted to (rather poor quality) graphics rather than being
converted to legacy equations.

--
Terry Farrell - MSWord MVP

"Ben Solomon (BTS)" <BenSolomonBTS@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:ACA37372-2BD9-4AF7-A11C-2E5A602C5DF9@microsoft.com...
>I have a problem with saving equations created in the 2007 Equation Editor
>to
> a 2003 file. My file is a 400 page doc with equations, diagrams, and
> portrait
> & landscape pages.
>
> Problems:
> 1. Saving the 2007 word file as a 2003 file causes the equations created
> by
> the 2007 equation editor to chop off 1/3 or 1/4 of the right side of the
> equation.
>
> 2. Printing to either Adobe PDF "printer" or a physical HP laser printer,
> causes the 2003 equations to be grainy. Additionally, the black fonts
> looks
> bluish in the pdf file.
>
> 3. The equations are correct and the fonts are correct if the pdf file is
> generated from the 2007 Word file.
>
> Packages:
> 1. I'm using the Adobe solutions from CS2. This gives me the the ability
> to
> mix
> and match pdf files.
> 2. Windows XP and Office 2007.
>
> Have to keep two versions, 2007 & 2003 because of page orientation
> problems.
> See post: Landscape pages are not faxed from Word 2007.
>
> Ben

Ben, Terry already responded, so I won't repeat the things he said in
his post. I would like to point out a couple of things about
"Microsoft Equation 3.0", which has traditionally been called simply
"Equation Editor": (Note that in my discussion below, the term
"Equation Editor" has the meaning just stated. When I refer to the
"new" equation tool in Word 2007, I'll refer to it as the "OMML
Equation Editor".)

1. Although I have personally in times past used the word "legacy", as
Terry did, to describe the equation editor that's been included with
Microsoft Office since version 2, it's really not the best word to
use. Calling Equation Editor a "legacy" product gives the impression
-- intentional or otherwise -- that it is old, outdated, obsolete, and
does not work well with current software. In fact, this is not the
case, and in your particular example it certainly would have proven to
be the opposite of that.

2. Equation Editor is the only formula editor that ships with
Microsoft Office 2008 for Macintosh, which fact is important for those
wanting or needing to collaborate with colleagues on a different
platform. Documents created in Word 2007 using the OMML Equation
Editor cannot be opened and fully edited in Word 2008 -- or in any
other version of Word for that matter. This is especially important in
scientific research and in education, where such collaboration is
essential. (On a similar note, some prominent scientific journals will
not accept manuscripts prepared with Word 2007 + OMML.)

I could go on, but it's not appropriate here to turn my reply to your
post into a diatribe against OMML. The two points above do apply to
your situation though, and I hope it helps put the 2 equation editors
into perspective.

--
Bob Mathews
Director of Training
Design Science, Inc.
bobm at dessci.com
http://www.dessci.com/free.asp?free=news
FREE fully-functional 30-day evaluation of MathType
MathType, WebEQ, MathPlayer, MathFlow, Equation Editor, TeXaide

On 17-Mar-2008, <BenSolomonBTS@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

> I have a problem with saving equations created in the 2007
> Equation Editor to a 2003 file. My file is a 400 page doc with
> equations, diagrams, and portrait & landscape pages.
>
> Problems:
> 1. Saving the 2007 word file as a 2003 file causes the equations
> created by the 2007 equation editor to chop off 1/3 or 1/4 of the
> right side of the equation.
>
> 2. Printing to either Adobe PDF "printer" or a physical HP laser
> printer, causes the 2003 equations to be grainy. Additionally,
> the black fonts looks bluish in the pdf file.
>
> 3. The equations are correct and the fonts are correct if the
> pdf file is generated from the 2007 Word file.
>
> Packages:
> 1. I'm using the Adobe solutions from CS2. This gives me the
> the ability to mix and match pdf files.
> 2. Windows XP and Office 2007.
>
> Have to keep two versions, 2007 & 2003 because of page
> orientation problems. See post: Landscape pages are not faxed from
> Word 2007.
>
> Ben

Yes, you are right, not what I wanted to hear, especially not for someone who
has been using MS products for as long as MS has been around. (Office is
always the first application I purchase with any new PC.)

The Ribbon is a major step forward, especially with Excel 2007 but I had to
advise my publisher not to upgrade to Office 2007, because these types of
problems are not tolerable in an commercial/industrial environment, and
always wondered if I had made the right call. Now I'm sure I did.

I hope MS will take some more time to improve the Office 2007's
compatibility with at least the Office 2003.

Best,
Ben

"Terry Farrell" wrote:

> 1. Word 2007 uses a different EE engine and back-conversion is very poor.
> However, if you need full backward compatibility, you can use Insert, Object
> Equation Editor 3 and it opens the legacy EE (which is the same as in Word
> 2003).
>
> 2. As above. Either print in Word 2007 mode or if you must use the legacy
> mode, then use the legacy Equation Editor.
>
> I know this isn't exactly what you wanted to hear, but the new EE is just
> totally different from the legacy EE that when you save in legacy mode, the
> equations are converted to (rather poor quality) graphics rather than being
> converted to legacy equations.
>
> --
> Terry Farrell - MSWord MVP
>
> "Ben Solomon (BTS)" <BenSolomonBTS@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:ACA37372-2BD9-4AF7-A11C-2E5A602C5DF9@microsoft.com...
> >I have a problem with saving equations created in the 2007 Equation Editor
> >to
> > a 2003 file. My file is a 400 page doc with equations, diagrams, and
> > portrait
> > & landscape pages.
> >
> > Problems:
> > 1. Saving the 2007 word file as a 2003 file causes the equations created
> > by
> > the 2007 equation editor to chop off 1/3 or 1/4 of the right side of the
> > equation.
> >
> > 2. Printing to either Adobe PDF "printer" or a physical HP laser printer,
> > causes the 2003 equations to be grainy. Additionally, the black fonts
> > looks
> > bluish in the pdf file.
> >
> > 3. The equations are correct and the fonts are correct if the pdf file is
> > generated from the 2007 Word file.
> >
> > Packages:
> > 1. I'm using the Adobe solutions from CS2. This gives me the the ability
> > to
> > mix
> > and match pdf files.
> > 2. Windows XP and Office 2007.
> >
> > Have to keep two versions, 2007 & 2003 because of page orientation
> > problems.
> > See post: Landscape pages are not faxed from Word 2007.
> >
> > Ben
>

Bob

Thanks for the confirmation. My advice will be that if users need
compatibility, they should continue to use EE v 3.0 and bypass the newer
version. Unfortunately, I cannot find a shortcut to add to the QAT other
than adding Insert, Object. So it is still a 2 click selection.

As you say, the Equation Editor v3.0 (Math Type) is certainly not old hat,
so I will stop calling it a legacy app. <g>

Terry Farrell

"Bob Mathews" <bob1@dessci.com> wrote in message
news:%233WRJVHiIHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Ben, Terry already responded, so I won't repeat the things he said in
> his post. I would like to point out a couple of things about
> "Microsoft Equation 3.0", which has traditionally been called simply
> "Equation Editor": (Note that in my discussion below, the term
> "Equation Editor" has the meaning just stated. When I refer to the
> "new" equation tool in Word 2007, I'll refer to it as the "OMML
> Equation Editor".)
>
> 1. Although I have personally in times past used the word "legacy", as
> Terry did, to describe the equation editor that's been included with
> Microsoft Office since version 2, it's really not the best word to
> use. Calling Equation Editor a "legacy" product gives the impression
> -- intentional or otherwise -- that it is old, outdated, obsolete, and
> does not work well with current software. In fact, this is not the
> case, and in your particular example it certainly would have proven to
> be the opposite of that.
>
> 2. Equation Editor is the only formula editor that ships with
> Microsoft Office 2008 for Macintosh, which fact is important for those
> wanting or needing to collaborate with colleagues on a different
> platform. Documents created in Word 2007 using the OMML Equation
> Editor cannot be opened and fully edited in Word 2008 -- or in any
> other version of Word for that matter. This is especially important in
> scientific research and in education, where such collaboration is
> essential. (On a similar note, some prominent scientific journals will
> not accept manuscripts prepared with Word 2007 + OMML.)
>
> I could go on, but it's not appropriate here to turn my reply to your
> post into a diatribe against OMML. The two points above do apply to
> your situation though, and I hope it helps put the 2 equation editors
> into perspective.
>
> --
> Bob Mathews
> Director of Training
> Design Science, Inc.
> bobm at dessci.com
> http://www.dessci.com/free.asp?free=news
> FREE fully-functional 30-day evaluation of MathType
> MathType, WebEQ, MathPlayer, MathFlow, Equation Editor, TeXaide
>
> On 17-Mar-2008, <BenSolomonBTS@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>> I have a problem with saving equations created in the 2007
>> Equation Editor to a 2003 file. My file is a 400 page doc with
>> equations, diagrams, and portrait & landscape pages.
>>
>> Problems:
>> 1. Saving the 2007 word file as a 2003 file causes the equations
>> created by the 2007 equation editor to chop off 1/3 or 1/4 of the
>> right side of the equation.
>>
>> 2. Printing to either Adobe PDF "printer" or a physical HP laser
>> printer, causes the 2003 equations to be grainy. Additionally,
>> the black fonts looks bluish in the pdf file.
>>
>> 3. The equations are correct and the fonts are correct if the
>> pdf file is generated from the 2007 Word file.
>>
>> Packages:
>> 1. I'm using the Adobe solutions from CS2. This gives me the
>> the ability to mix and match pdf files.
>> 2. Windows XP and Office 2007.
>>
>> Have to keep two versions, 2007 & 2003 because of page
>> orientation problems. See post: Landscape pages are not faxed from
>> Word 2007.
>>
>> Ben

Hi Terry,

Add this macro to Normal.dotm, and then you can add a QAT button to run the
macro.

Sub RunEqnEditor()
ActiveDocument.InlineShapes.AddOLEObject _
ClassType:="Equation.3", Range:=Selection.Range
End Sub

--
Regards,
Jay Freedman
Microsoft Word MVP FAQ: http://word.mvps.org
Email cannot be acknowledged; please post all follow-ups to the newsgroup so
all may benefit.

Terry Farrell wrote:
> Bob
>
> Thanks for the confirmation. My advice will be that if users need
> compatibility, they should continue to use EE v 3.0 and bypass the
> newer version. Unfortunately, I cannot find a shortcut to add to the
> QAT other than adding Insert, Object. So it is still a 2 click
> selection.
> As you say, the Equation Editor v3.0 (Math Type) is certainly not old
> hat, so I will stop calling it a legacy app. <g>
>
> Terry Farrell
>
> "Bob Mathews" <bob1@dessci.com> wrote in message
> news:%233WRJVHiIHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Ben, Terry already responded, so I won't repeat the things he said in
>> his post. I would like to point out a couple of things about
>> "Microsoft Equation 3.0", which has traditionally been called simply
>> "Equation Editor": (Note that in my discussion below, the term
>> "Equation Editor" has the meaning just stated. When I refer to the
>> "new" equation tool in Word 2007, I'll refer to it as the "OMML
>> Equation Editor".)
>>
>> 1. Although I have personally in times past used the word "legacy",
>> as Terry did, to describe the equation editor that's been included
>> with Microsoft Office since version 2, it's really not the best word
>> to use. Calling Equation Editor a "legacy" product gives the
>> impression -- intentional or otherwise -- that it is old, outdated,
>> obsolete, and does not work well with current software. In fact,
>> this is not the case, and in your particular example it certainly
>> would have proven to be the opposite of that.
>>
>> 2. Equation Editor is the only formula editor that ships with
>> Microsoft Office 2008 for Macintosh, which fact is important for
>> those wanting or needing to collaborate with colleagues on a
>> different platform. Documents created in Word 2007 using the OMML
>> Equation Editor cannot be opened and fully edited in Word 2008 -- or
>> in any other version of Word for that matter. This is especially
>> important in scientific research and in education, where such
>> collaboration is essential. (On a similar note, some prominent
>> scientific journals will not accept manuscripts prepared with Word
>> 2007 + OMML.) I could go on, but it's not appropriate here to turn my
>> reply to your
>> post into a diatribe against OMML. The two points above do apply to
>> your situation though, and I hope it helps put the 2 equation editors
>> into perspective.
>>
>> --
>> Bob Mathews
>> Director of Training
>> Design Science, Inc.
>> bobm at dessci.com
>> http://www.dessci.com/free.asp?free=news
>> FREE fully-functional 30-day evaluation of MathType
>> MathType, WebEQ, MathPlayer, MathFlow, Equation Editor, TeXaide
>>
>> On 17-Mar-2008, <BenSolomonBTS@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I have a problem with saving equations created in the 2007
>>> Equation Editor to a 2003 file. My file is a 400 page doc with
>>> equations, diagrams, and portrait & landscape pages.
>>>
>>> Problems:
>>> 1. Saving the 2007 word file as a 2003 file causes the equations
>>> created by the 2007 equation editor to chop off 1/3 or 1/4 of the
>>> right side of the equation.
>>>
>>> 2. Printing to either Adobe PDF "printer" or a physical HP laser
>>> printer, causes the 2003 equations to be grainy. Additionally,
>>> the black fonts looks bluish in the pdf file.
>>>
>>> 3. The equations are correct and the fonts are correct if the
>>> pdf file is generated from the 2007 Word file.
>>>
>>> Packages:
>>> 1. I'm using the Adobe solutions from CS2. This gives me the
>>> the ability to mix and match pdf files.
>>> 2. Windows XP and Office 2007.
>>>
>>> Have to keep two versions, 2007 & 2003 because of page
>>> orientation problems. See post: Landscape pages are not faxed from
>>> Word 2007.
>>>
>>> Ben

Thanks Jay.

Terry

"Jay Freedman" <jay.freedman@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:e9PxEASiIHA.4436@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Hi Terry,
>
> Add this macro to Normal.dotm, and then you can add a QAT button to run
> the macro.
>
> Sub RunEqnEditor()
> ActiveDocument.InlineShapes.AddOLEObject _
> ClassType:="Equation.3", Range:=Selection.Range
> End Sub
>
> --
> Regards,
> Jay Freedman
> Microsoft Word MVP FAQ: http://word.mvps.org
> Email cannot be acknowledged; please post all follow-ups to the newsgroup
> so all may benefit.
>
> Terry Farrell wrote:
>> Bob
>>
>> Thanks for the confirmation. My advice will be that if users need
>> compatibility, they should continue to use EE v 3.0 and bypass the
>> newer version. Unfortunately, I cannot find a shortcut to add to the
>> QAT other than adding Insert, Object. So it is still a 2 click
>> selection.
>> As you say, the Equation Editor v3.0 (Math Type) is certainly not old
>> hat, so I will stop calling it a legacy app. <g>
>>
>> Terry Farrell
>>
>> "Bob Mathews" <bob1@dessci.com> wrote in message
>> news:%233WRJVHiIHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>> Ben, Terry already responded, so I won't repeat the things he said in
>>> his post. I would like to point out a couple of things about
>>> "Microsoft Equation 3.0", which has traditionally been called simply
>>> "Equation Editor": (Note that in my discussion below, the term
>>> "Equation Editor" has the meaning just stated. When I refer to the
>>> "new" equation tool in Word 2007, I'll refer to it as the "OMML
>>> Equation Editor".)
>>>
>>> 1. Although I have personally in times past used the word "legacy",
>>> as Terry did, to describe the equation editor that's been included
>>> with Microsoft Office since version 2, it's really not the best word
>>> to use. Calling Equation Editor a "legacy" product gives the
>>> impression -- intentional or otherwise -- that it is old, outdated,
>>> obsolete, and does not work well with current software. In fact,
>>> this is not the case, and in your particular example it certainly
>>> would have proven to be the opposite of that.
>>>
>>> 2. Equation Editor is the only formula editor that ships with
>>> Microsoft Office 2008 for Macintosh, which fact is important for
>>> those wanting or needing to collaborate with colleagues on a
>>> different platform. Documents created in Word 2007 using the OMML
>>> Equation Editor cannot be opened and fully edited in Word 2008 -- or
>>> in any other version of Word for that matter. This is especially
>>> important in scientific research and in education, where such
>>> collaboration is essential. (On a similar note, some prominent
>>> scientific journals will not accept manuscripts prepared with Word
>>> 2007 + OMML.) I could go on, but it's not appropriate here to turn my
>>> reply to your
>>> post into a diatribe against OMML. The two points above do apply to
>>> your situation though, and I hope it helps put the 2 equation editors
>>> into perspective.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Bob Mathews
>>> Director of Training
>>> Design Science, Inc.
>>> bobm at dessci.com
>>> http://www.dessci.com/free.asp?free=news
>>> FREE fully-functional 30-day evaluation of MathType
>>> MathType, WebEQ, MathPlayer, MathFlow, Equation Editor, TeXaide
>>>
>>> On 17-Mar-2008, <BenSolomonBTS@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have a problem with saving equations created in the 2007
>>>> Equation Editor to a 2003 file. My file is a 400 page doc with
>>>> equations, diagrams, and portrait & landscape pages.
>>>>
>>>> Problems:
>>>> 1. Saving the 2007 word file as a 2003 file causes the equations
>>>> created by the 2007 equation editor to chop off 1/3 or 1/4 of the
>>>> right side of the equation.
>>>>
>>>> 2. Printing to either Adobe PDF "printer" or a physical HP laser
>>>> printer, causes the 2003 equations to be grainy. Additionally,
>>>> the black fonts looks bluish in the pdf file.
>>>>
>>>> 3. The equations are correct and the fonts are correct if the
>>>> pdf file is generated from the 2007 Word file.
>>>>
>>>> Packages:
>>>> 1. I'm using the Adobe solutions from CS2. This gives me the
>>>> the ability to mix and match pdf files.
>>>> 2. Windows XP and Office 2007.
>>>>
>>>> Have to keep two versions, 2007 & 2003 because of page
>>>> orientation problems. See post: Landscape pages are not faxed from
>>>> Word 2007.
>>>>
>>>> Ben
>
>