[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

I'd agree on both points, with the caveats mentioned in my earlier post.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

"PamC via OfficeKB.com" u43222@uwe wrote in message
news:947faa4cdaf5b@uwe...
I avoid using floating/wrapping objects until after editing and reviews
because even light copyediting can change the object's position, and
substantive reviews nearly always do. Also, if the tables need to break
across pages, in-line would be better.

PamC

Mark Tangard wrote:
A user of mine will shortly build a very very long Word document with
2-column
text and many, many tables, all of them full-page-width and about one-half
page
high.

I see 2 main ways to do this:

(1) Float each table, so that it displaces the text like a picture, OR:

(2) Place a section break before and after each table, make they section
they
enclose a one-column layout, and have the table sit there "inline" rather
than
floating.

After the file is assembled it'll be edited often, but not drastically, so
ease
of editing & reformatting isn't an issue. And I'll probably write a macro
for
her to do the inserting, so the number or complexity of steps won't be
much an
obstacle. We're mainly concerned with the stability of what may be a very
large
file.

Given that concern, which method would you choose? Is #2 more likely to
have
problems because it'll have a large number of section breaks (which we all
know
are evil incarnate)?

Also, up til now, due to bad experiences with the "positioning" feature in
Word
tables long ago, I've always used frames to float tables. Is that any
wiser?

Any opinions appreciated. Word 2003, WinXP.

MT

--
Message posted via http://www.officekb.com