Okay, here's the question:

I'm generating a Word doc on the fly with ASP. I've pretty well figured out everything that I want to do, exceeeeeeeept...for embedding a header image. I want to embed a logo on the header of each page, but can't figure out how for the life of me.

NOTE: because this is going on a shared server and not my own, plugins/custom components are not an option. So whatever I do has to be purely code.

Any ideas? Thanks.

You can create the document in HTML the save it as a .doc

    Response.AppendHeader("Content-Type", "application/msword")
    Response.AppendHeader ("Content-disposition", _
                           "attachment; filename=filename.doc")
    Response.Write(docBody)

and you can download the Office HTML and XML Reference which tells you all you need to know about those mso-normal bits and pieces.

Yeah, I had the first part figured out (saving the .doc). It was the MSO normal thing I've never really been familiar with. Guess I'll have to learn it.

Thanks, dude.

Okay, before I rip my hair out, I need some more help (how rare is THAT?)

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?>
<?mso-application progid="Word.Document"?>
<?XML-stylesheet type="text/css" href="CSS/xml-renewal.css"?>
<w:wordDocument xmlns:w="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/wordml" xmlns:v="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/wordml" xmlns:o="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/wordml">
  <w:docPr>
  <w:view w:val="print"/>
  <w:zoom w:percent="100"/>
  <w:proofState w:spelling="clean" w:grammar="clean"/>
</w:docPr>
<w:body>
<div class="Section2">
<p class="MsoNormal">Dear <strong>Joe Smith</strong>:</p>
</div>
</w:body>
</w:wordDocument>

I must be missing something painfully obvious...but every time I save this as a Word doc, it turns up completely blank. I get all the pages, but each page contains a series of carriage return characters and no text. And I want to use the XML to set the print view, because by default, the web view shows up.

So...how do I get the stuff to actually appear?

It's not the CSS (it works.)
It's not the XML itself (since it works too.)
It's not the Section2 div (I've changed this twice).

I'm not sure what else I'm missing.

Never mind. I just figured out what I was doing wrong (another case of 1,000,000 answers, one correct one, and finding the needle in the haystack.)

But I got it now.

I don't get it. In ASP.NET this would take 15 lines of code. Create an instance of the WordDocument object, add it's content, then write it to a file or to the Response object. Why would you do this in ASP Old SchooL? That's like hand cuffing your ankles together and running a marathon. I know you already have more experience than Moses in ASP but you can link to an ASP.NET page that runs under the same IIS site and then from that page you can take advantage of all the modern stuff. The good thing about using the OfficeDocument sub classes is they live in the GAC so when Microsoft goes and changes things, you won't need any code changes to stay up to date. If you hard code the format, and it gets subject to change, you have to change all your generating code.

Actually, in this case it wasn't ASP that was the problem at all...it was Word specifically, or to put it more accurately the lack of accurate documentation around Word's version of XML. I'm reminded of when I first tried to learn ASP about 7 years ago...it was the same level of frustration.

The reason I won't go to .NET is simply because I have too much stuff compiled in ASP that wouldn't port over. I wrote it by myself, for myself.

I don't wanna learn anymore either. My brain's too full.

That's what I'm trying to say. The OfficeDocument abstract class has an intimate knowledge of the XML formats they've used in Microsoft Office. You can save to Word 2002, Word 2003, or even the bloated html from Word 97. The .NET objects tap directly into the Microsoft Office interoperability framework - what Word uses, but also what the free Word Viewer uses for people to open Word docs in read-only mode. When Microsoft changes this or adds a new format, the core Office Interop DLLs get pushed down to the machine in a Windows Update.

By using the .NET libraries, you'll always be using the proper version and formatting for whatever XML variety is for the Office product you want to target. I'm pushing you for this situation because I had to upgrade an ASP page that made Excel files using OLE Automation to use the proper methods in ASP.NET now. The old one was really finicky and fragile, but the new one just works. You can't imagine how relieved I was. I wish my good friends could or would take advantage of the same great time and stress saver I was so happy with.

Also, I think there are two misunderstandings. Even tho you got it fixed anyway, this is just for future reference

1. You don't have to convert everything to ASP.NET to take advantage of its wonderfulness. You can just drop one ASP.NET page into a web site with all ASP pages and the server just runs each of them the right way. Kind of like how you can use HTML (static) pages in an ASP site, and IIS knows which ones to serve, and which ones to parse first.
2. You could always run the code conversion wizard to take all of your ASP pages and let the system build ASP.NET pages for you. I did this once, too, in a site with about 350 pages. I didn't think automatic generator tools worked, but the transition was seamless. And the company was thrilled at how much faster the site ran from DLL files on the same hardware! I know you're not gonna do that, and maybe in Canadaland you don't have to? But it's an option on the table.

There's really a lot of stuff in ASP.NET that a bright, creative guy like you could take advantage of. Even without having to change a line of your existing code - just tapping into the new stuff on an as needed basis.

I must sound like a Cult of Mac person. But you know me well enough that I wouldn't be advocating a programming foundation unless I really strongly thought the person I was talking to could benefit from it. In your case, you're thinking like it's 2601 but programming like it's 1899.

Are you sure? I've never heard of any of the Office software having apis to build new files in .net? I don't use Office much these days, but I've always gone with the same kind of stuff Adam is doing.

John: there will be a time I'll learn ASP.NET. But, like most people, it'll happen when I'm forced to learn it.

As of right now, I'm not forced.

Out of curiosity what means forced? A job that requires it? Cause for me it's when it becomes easier to learn a new technology than to mold one I already know around a situation.

I ask because there are dufuses who read a 1200 page book and then do exactly what everybody else is doing, and there are people who come up with clever spam filters.

Precisely, John. When I have a job that requires me to know it, then I'll learn it. I'll just need the syntax, since I'll have the application.