microsoft equations

  • Thread starter Thread starter Connie
  • Start date Start date
If you go to Insert, Object and select Object, you will be presented with a
list of objects that includes EE v 3.0 (as was ion Word 2003).
 
Thank you so much

Terry Farrell said:
If you go to Insert, Object and select Object, you will be presented with a
list of objects that includes EE v 3.0 (as was ion Word 2003).
 
If you mean "Microsoft Equation 3.0" (AKA "Equation Editor), then
click the Insert tab on the Ribbon. In the Text group, click Object.
Select MS Eqn 3.0 from the list, and click OK.

MathType also works very well in Office 2007, and puts its own tab on
the Ribbon in Word and PowerPoint. (More info at the link in my sig.)

--
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
 
Tnx - I was looking for this too.

Do I understand correctly - a Word 2007 "compatibility mode" document cannot
use the new Word equation editor? The only was to add an equation in this
type of document is to use the method you mention?

Jeff
 
Tnx - I was looking for this too.

Do I understand correctly - a Word 2007 "compatibility mode" document cannot
use the new Word equation editor? The only was to add an equation in this
type of document is to use the method you mention?

Jeff

Yes, that's substantially correct. When a document is open in compatibility
mode, the Equation button on the Insert ribbon is disabled.

However, you can click Office button > Convert to take the document out of
compatibility mode and then use the new equation editor. If you then use Save As
Word 97-2003 format, the equations are converted to images, and that's what
down-level Word users will see. If they edit the document (but don't touch the
equations), and then you bring it back into Word 2007 and convert it again, the
equations will be editable again. In theory, there's no limit to the number of
round trips, but I don't know how well the theory holds up. :-)
 
Back
Top