How can Sweave users collaborate with Word users?

calendar_today Asked May 16, 2012
thumb_up 7 upvotes
history Updated April 14, 2026

Direct Answer

I use a combination of approaches, depending on who is editing. My default is to have editors / collaborators markup a PDF or hard copy. Foxit Reader is free and provides more…. This is an advisory response with reference links, ranked #4th of 32 by community upvote score, from 2012.


The Problem (Q-score 17, ranked #4th of 32 in the Word VBA archive)

The scenario as originally posted in 2012

I’d like to pitch the question discussed here to the SO community: what is the best way for Sweave users to collaborate with Word users?

I’m trying to move my entire workflow to R and Sweave (or similar, e.g. maybe Knitr will prove more useful). However, the last step in my workflow is usually to write a manuscript with collaborators. They work by passing MS Word documents back and forth, and editing text using Track Changes.

Let’s stipulate that I can’t convince any of them to learn any new software – their process isn’t going to change. I am looking for a straightforward way to:

1.) send Sweave-created documents to coauthors

2.) allow them to open the documents in Word and make tracked changes

3.) receive the edited documents and reincorporate them into Sweave, ideally with co-authors’ changes highlighted in some way

4.) And if the solution works for OSX, that would be great.

The discussion on the R help mailing list focusses on SWord which appears to be undocumented and available only for Windows. Does anyone know if it is good? The discussion on Vanderbilt’s biostatistics wiki is good on ways to get Sweave documents into Word-readable forms, but no so much on how to integrate edited Word documents with Sweave.

Why community consensus is tight on this one

Across 32 Word VBA entries in the archive, the accepted answer here holds solid answer (above median) status — meaning voters are unusually aligned on the right fix.


The Verified Solution — solid answer (above median) (+7)

Advisory answer — community consensus with reference links

Note: the verified answer below is a reference / advisory response rather than a copy-ready snippet.

I use a combination of approaches, depending on who is editing. My default is to have editors / collaborators markup a PDF or hard copy. Foxit Reader is free and provides more extensive PDF commenting tools than Acrobat reader, although reader allows comment bubbles.

For more extensive contributions, it helps that I separate out the Sweave parts of a document from the main text, e.g. by writing results in results.Rnw and the inserting input{results.tex} into the main document. This allows you to send around the part that does not include the R markup. You can also copy-paste everything between the preamble and bibliography into a word document, and ask users to ignore the markup. If you copy-paste from an editor with syntax highlighting, it can be copied to word, making the process easier.

You might also consider using Inference for R, which is like Sweave for Word. There is also Lyx, which requires users to learn a new program, but which is easier to use than Sweave.


When to Use It — vintage (14+ years old, pre-2013)

A top-10 Word VBA pattern — why it still holds up

Ranks #4th of 32 in the Word VBA archive. The only pattern ranked immediately above it is “XML – adding new line” — compare both if you’re choosing between approaches.

What changed between 2012 and 2026

The answer is 14 years old. The Word VBA object model has been stable across Office 2013, 2016, 2019, 2021, 365, and 2024/2026 LTSC, so the pattern still compiles. Changes that might affect you: 64-bit API declarations (use PtrSafe), blocked macros in downloaded files (Mark-of-the-Web), and the shift toward Office Scripts for web-first workflows.

help
Frequently Asked Questions

Is this above-median answer still worth copying?
expand_more

Answer score +7 vs the Word VBA archive median ~4; this entry is solid. The score plus 17 supporting upvotes on the question itself (+17) means the asker and 6 subsequent voters all validated the approach.

This answer links out — what are the reference links worth following?
expand_more

Read the first external link for the canonical reference, then search this archive for a top-10 entry in the same category — advisory answers are best paired with a ranked code snippet to close the loop.

This answer is 14 years old. Is it still relevant in 2026?
expand_more

Published 2012, which is 14 year(s) before today’s Office 2026 build. The Word VBA object model has had no breaking changes in that window. Three things to re-test: (1) blocked macros on downloaded files (Mark-of-the-Web), (2) 64-bit API declarations (PtrSafe, LongPtr), (3) any shift toward Office Scripts for web scenarios.

Which Word VBA pattern ranks just above this one at #3?
expand_more

The pattern one rank above is “XML – adding new line”. If your use case overlaps, compare both before committing.

Data source: Community-verified Q&A snapshot. Q-score 17, Answer-score 7, original post 2012, ranked #4th of 32 in the Word VBA archive. Last regenerated April 14, 2026.