[Mark Tangard[_2_]]

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

[grammatim[_2_]]

What are you calling "very, very long"? Some people posting here say
that a 100-page document is "very, very long," but it wouldn't be
problematic in the least.

I'd appreciate knowing how you "float" a table, which is something
built into FrameMaker but I have never discovered in Word.

On Apr 12, 3:06*am, Mark Tangard ]
speakeasy.net 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

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

The decision should be based on how you want the text to behave relative to
the tables. If you insert section breaks in order to make the tables inline,
the text in column 1 will be continued in column 2 above the table, then
resume in column 1 below the table. If you insert the table wrapped
(floating), the text in column 1 above the table will continue in column 1
below the table before snaking to column 2:

Inline
Text 1 Text 2
Table Table Table
Text 3 Text 4

Floating
Text 1 Text 3
Table Table Table
Text 2 Text 4

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

"Mark Tangard" wrote in
message ...
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

[PamC via OfficeKB.com]

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

[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

[Jay Freedman]

At the risk of going somewhat off-topic:

I'd appreciate knowing how you "float" a table, which is something
built into FrameMaker but I have never discovered in Word.

The easy way: When the mouse pointer hovers over the table, a small square
containing a 4-way arrow appears off the northwest corner of the table. If you
drag that square, the table becomes a floating object.

The harder way: Go to the Table Properties dialog and click the Around button
under Text Wrapping. Also, once the table is floating, the None button in the
dialog is the only way to get it in-line again.

--
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.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 05:59:45 -0700 (PDT), grammatim
wrote:

What are you calling "very, very long"? Some people posting here say
that a 100-page document is "very, very long," but it wouldn't be
problematic in the least.

I'd appreciate knowing how you "float" a table, which is something
built into FrameMaker but I have never discovered in Word.

On Apr 12, 3:06*am, Mark Tangard ]
speakeasy.net 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

[grammatim[_2_]]

Oh -- that's something different. In FrameMaker, when you make
something Float, it goes to the top of the next page (next column) if
it won't fit on the page its anchor is on, and the text flows around
it. Since Word isn't page-oriented, I don't expect it can do that.

On Apr 12, 11:43*am, Jay Freedman wrote:
At the risk of going somewhat off-topic:

I'd appreciate knowing how you "float" a table, which is something
built into FrameMaker but I have never discovered in Word.

The easy way: When the mouse pointer hovers over the table, a small square
containing a 4-way arrow appears off the northwest corner of the table. If you
drag that square, the table becomes a floating object.

The harder way: Go to the Table Properties dialog and click the Around button
under Text Wrapping. Also, once the table is floating, the None button in the
dialog is the only way to get it in-line again.

--
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.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 05:59:45 -0700 (PDT), grammatim
wrote:



What are you calling "very, very long"? Some people posting here say
that a 100-page document is "very, very long," but it wouldn't be
problematic in the least.

I'd appreciate knowing how you "float" a table, which is something
built into FrameMaker but I have never discovered in Word.

On Apr 12, 3:06*am, Mark Tangard ]
speakeasy.net 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-

[Jay Freedman]

Well, you already knew that Microsoft subscribes to the Red Queen school of word
definitions. ;-)

You're correct, in Word the text does not flow from after a 'floating' object to
fill the space before it.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 11:50:50 -0700 (PDT), grammatim
wrote:

Oh -- that's something different. In FrameMaker, when you make
something Float, it goes to the top of the next page (next column) if
it won't fit on the page its anchor is on, and the text flows around
it. Since Word isn't page-oriented, I don't expect it can do that.

On Apr 12, 11:43*am, Jay Freedman wrote:
At the risk of going somewhat off-topic:

I'd appreciate knowing how you "float" a table, which is something
built into FrameMaker but I have never discovered in Word.

The easy way: When the mouse pointer hovers over the table, a small square
containing a 4-way arrow appears off the northwest corner of the table. If you
drag that square, the table becomes a floating object.

The harder way: Go to the Table Properties dialog and click the Around button
under Text Wrapping. Also, once the table is floating, the None button in the
dialog is the only way to get it in-line again.

--
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.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 05:59:45 -0700 (PDT), grammatim
wrote:



What are you calling "very, very long"? Some people posting here say
that a 100-page document is "very, very long," but it wouldn't be
problematic in the least.

I'd appreciate knowing how you "float" a table, which is something
built into FrameMaker but I have never discovered in Word.

On Apr 12, 3:06*am, Mark Tangard ]
speakeasy.net 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-

[Jay Freedman]

And of course it was Humpty Dumpty, not the Red Queen. I hate when that happens.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 16:58:31 -0400, Jay Freedman
wrote:

Well, you already knew that Microsoft subscribes to the Red Queen school of word
definitions. ;-)

You're correct, in Word the text does not flow from after a 'floating' object to
fill the space before it.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 11:50:50 -0700 (PDT), grammatim
wrote:

Oh -- that's something different. In FrameMaker, when you make
something Float, it goes to the top of the next page (next column) if
it won't fit on the page its anchor is on, and the text flows around
it. Since Word isn't page-oriented, I don't expect it can do that.

On Apr 12, 11:43*am, Jay Freedman wrote:
At the risk of going somewhat off-topic:

I'd appreciate knowing how you "float" a table, which is something
built into FrameMaker but I have never discovered in Word.

The easy way: When the mouse pointer hovers over the table, a small square
containing a 4-way arrow appears off the northwest corner of the table. If you
drag that square, the table becomes a floating object.

The harder way: Go to the Table Properties dialog and click the Around button
under Text Wrapping. Also, once the table is floating, the None button in the
dialog is the only way to get it in-line again.

--
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.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 05:59:45 -0700 (PDT), grammatim
wrote:



What are you calling "very, very long"? Some people posting here say
that a 100-page document is "very, very long," but it wouldn't be
problematic in the least.

I'd appreciate knowing how you "float" a table, which is something
built into FrameMaker but I have never discovered in Word.

On Apr 12, 3:06*am, Mark Tangard ]
speakeasy.net 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-

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

Actually, text does flow around the floating object (both back and forth);
you just can't have a full-page floating object.

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

"Jay Freedman" wrote in message
...
Well, you already knew that Microsoft subscribes to the Red Queen school
of word
definitions. ;-)

You're correct, in Word the text does not flow from after a 'floating'
object to
fill the space before it.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 11:50:50 -0700 (PDT), grammatim

wrote:

Oh -- that's something different. In FrameMaker, when you make
something Float, it goes to the top of the next page (next column) if
it won't fit on the page its anchor is on, and the text flows around
it. Since Word isn't page-oriented, I don't expect it can do that.

On Apr 12, 11:43 am, Jay Freedman wrote:
At the risk of going somewhat off-topic:

I'd appreciate knowing how you "float" a table, which is something
built into FrameMaker but I have never discovered in Word.

The easy way: When the mouse pointer hovers over the table, a small
square
containing a 4-way arrow appears off the northwest corner of the table.
If you
drag that square, the table becomes a floating object.

The harder way: Go to the Table Properties dialog and click the Around
button
under Text Wrapping. Also, once the table is floating, the None button
in the
dialog is the only way to get it in-line again.

--
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.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 05:59:45 -0700 (PDT), grammatim

wrote:



What are you calling "very, very long"? Some people posting here say
that a 100-page document is "very, very long," but it wouldn't be
problematic in the least.

I'd appreciate knowing how you "float" a table, which is something
built into FrameMaker but I have never discovered in Word.

On Apr 12, 3:06 am, Mark Tangard ]
speakeasy.net 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-

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

Well, the Red Queen is appropriate, too, if you like doing impossible things
before breakfast.

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

"Jay Freedman" wrote in message
...
And of course it was Humpty Dumpty, not the Red Queen. I hate when that
happens.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 16:58:31 -0400, Jay Freedman

wrote:

Well, you already knew that Microsoft subscribes to the Red Queen school
of word
definitions. ;-)

You're correct, in Word the text does not flow from after a 'floating'
object to
fill the space before it.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 11:50:50 -0700 (PDT), grammatim

wrote:

Oh -- that's something different. In FrameMaker, when you make
something Float, it goes to the top of the next page (next column) if
it won't fit on the page its anchor is on, and the text flows around
it. Since Word isn't page-oriented, I don't expect it can do that.

On Apr 12, 11:43 am, Jay Freedman wrote:
At the risk of going somewhat off-topic:

I'd appreciate knowing how you "float" a table, which is something
built into FrameMaker but I have never discovered in Word.

The easy way: When the mouse pointer hovers over the table, a small
square
containing a 4-way arrow appears off the northwest corner of the table.
If you
drag that square, the table becomes a floating object.

The harder way: Go to the Table Properties dialog and click the Around
button
under Text Wrapping. Also, once the table is floating, the None button
in the
dialog is the only way to get it in-line again.

--
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.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 05:59:45 -0700 (PDT), grammatim

wrote:



What are you calling "very, very long"? Some people posting here say
that a 100-page document is "very, very long," but it wouldn't be
problematic in the least.

I'd appreciate knowing how you "float" a table, which is something
built into FrameMaker but I have never discovered in Word.

On Apr 12, 3:06 am, Mark Tangard ]
speakeasy.net 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-

[Jay Freedman]

OK, I was a bit imprecise.

The text will flow back before the picture only within the same page. In the
situation grammatim described, Word will _not_ backfill the empty space at the
bottom of the page that originally contained the anchor paragraph; both the
paragraph and the picture move to the next page. To let it backfill the
preceding page, you have to manually move the anchor to a later paragraph.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 18:13:06 -0500, "Suzanne S. Barnhill"
wrote:

Actually, text does flow around the floating object (both back and forth);
you just can't have a full-page floating object.

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

"Jay Freedman" wrote in message
.. .
Well, you already knew that Microsoft subscribes to the Red Queen school
of word
definitions. ;-)

You're correct, in Word the text does not flow from after a 'floating'
object to
fill the space before it.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 11:50:50 -0700 (PDT), grammatim

wrote:

Oh -- that's something different. In FrameMaker, when you make
something Float, it goes to the top of the next page (next column) if
it won't fit on the page its anchor is on, and the text flows around
it. Since Word isn't page-oriented, I don't expect it can do that.

On Apr 12, 11:43 am, Jay Freedman wrote:
At the risk of going somewhat off-topic:

I'd appreciate knowing how you "float" a table, which is something
built into FrameMaker but I have never discovered in Word.

The easy way: When the mouse pointer hovers over the table, a small
square
containing a 4-way arrow appears off the northwest corner of the table.
If you
drag that square, the table becomes a floating object.

The harder way: Go to the Table Properties dialog and click the Around
button
under Text Wrapping. Also, once the table is floating, the None button
in the
dialog is the only way to get it in-line again.

--
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.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 05:59:45 -0700 (PDT), grammatim

wrote:



What are you calling "very, very long"? Some people posting here say
that a 100-page document is "very, very long," but it wouldn't be
problematic in the least.

I'd appreciate knowing how you "float" a table, which is something
built into FrameMaker but I have never discovered in Word.

On Apr 12, 3:06 am, Mark Tangard ]
speakeasy.net 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-

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

I use wrapped objects so seldom that I have to think about how I've handled
that when I have used them, and I guess, as you say, I've moved the anchor.

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

"Jay Freedman" wrote in message
...
OK, I was a bit imprecise.

The text will flow back before the picture only within the same page. In
the
situation grammatim described, Word will _not_ backfill the empty space at
the
bottom of the page that originally contained the anchor paragraph; both
the
paragraph and the picture move to the next page. To let it backfill the
preceding page, you have to manually move the anchor to a later paragraph.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 18:13:06 -0500, "Suzanne S. Barnhill"

wrote:

Actually, text does flow around the floating object (both back and forth);
you just can't have a full-page floating object.

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

"Jay Freedman" wrote in message
. ..
Well, you already knew that Microsoft subscribes to the Red Queen school
of word
definitions. ;-)

You're correct, in Word the text does not flow from after a 'floating'
object to
fill the space before it.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 11:50:50 -0700 (PDT), grammatim

wrote:

Oh -- that's something different. In FrameMaker, when you make
something Float, it goes to the top of the next page (next column) if
it won't fit on the page its anchor is on, and the text flows around
it. Since Word isn't page-oriented, I don't expect it can do that.

On Apr 12, 11:43 am, Jay Freedman wrote:
At the risk of going somewhat off-topic:

I'd appreciate knowing how you "float" a table, which is something
built into FrameMaker but I have never discovered in Word.

The easy way: When the mouse pointer hovers over the table, a small
square
containing a 4-way arrow appears off the northwest corner of the
table.
If you
drag that square, the table becomes a floating object.

The harder way: Go to the Table Properties dialog and click the Around
button
under Text Wrapping. Also, once the table is floating, the None button
in the
dialog is the only way to get it in-line again.

--
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.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 05:59:45 -0700 (PDT), grammatim

wrote:



What are you calling "very, very long"? Some people posting here say
that a 100-page document is "very, very long," but it wouldn't be
problematic in the least.

I'd appreciate knowing how you "float" a table, which is something
built into FrameMaker but I have never discovered in Word.

On Apr 12, 3:06 am, Mark Tangard ]
speakeasy.net 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-

[Mark Tangard[_2_]]

Hi Suzanne,

I should've added one detail that makes this consideration moot: the tables will
all be placed at the top or bottom of the page.

Suzanne S. Barnhill wrote:
The decision should be based on how you want the text to behave relative
to the tables. If you insert section breaks in order to make the tables
inline, the text in column 1 will be continued in column 2 above the
table, then resume in column 1 below the table. If you insert the table
wrapped (floating), the text in column 1 above the table will continue
in column 1 below the table before snaking to column 2:

Inline
Text 1 Text 2
Table Table Table
Text 3 Text 4

Floating
Text 1 Text 3
Table Table Table
Text 2 Text 4

[Mark Tangard[_2_]]

Hi Pam. Yes, I'm generally of the same mind; but this is a case of only very
light editing -- mostly just changing a few numbers in the tables and a few
words in the text; so our goal in choosing between the two methods is to
maximize the file's stability through many saves (probably dozens daily over the
course of a few years), given it'll be a very large file and may have several
hundred "sections" which in itself can make a file temperamental.

To answer your earlier question, yes, it's likely to be very very long, perhaps
thousands of pages. All tables will be the same size and structure, none will be
long enough to break across pages, and all will be formatted to ensure they don't.


PamC via OfficeKB.com wrote:

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

[Mark Tangard[_2_]]

Agh, sorry, just realized the question on length wasn't from Pam, but from
grammatim.

So gang, given that the text-wrapping pattern Suzanne mentioned isn't an issue
for this doc (see earlier post), which method do you think would give us the
most, um, emotionally secure file?

MT


Mark Tangard wrote:

Hi Pam. Yes, I'm generally of the same mind; but this is a case of only
very light editing -- mostly just changing a few numbers in the tables
and a few words in the text; so our goal in choosing between the two
methods is to maximize the file's stability through many saves (probably
dozens daily over the course of a few years), given it'll be a very
large file and may have several hundred "sections" which in itself can
make a file temperamental.

To answer your earlier question, yes, it's likely to be very very long,
perhaps thousands of pages. All tables will be the same size and
structure, none will be long enough to break across pages, and all will
be formatted to ensure they don't.


PamC via OfficeKB.com wrote:

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

[Jay Freedman]

My vote would be for section breaks.

Floating objects of any kind far too easily move out of position, either with a
stray mouse move or "just because they can". We've seen floating things move to
odd locations, and even disappear because they were outside the boundaries of
any page.

As I know you're aware, a project of this sort demands frequent and multiple
backups. It would even be advisable to run a periodic check of the backups to
verify that they're trustworthy -- there's nothing worse than corrupting a
document and then finding that the backup is also corrupt.

--
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.

On Mon, 13 Apr 2009 00:23:56 -0800, Mark Tangard
wrote:

Agh, sorry, just realized the question on length wasn't from Pam, but from
grammatim.

So gang, given that the text-wrapping pattern Suzanne mentioned isn't an issue
for this doc (see earlier post), which method do you think would give us the
most, um, emotionally secure file?

MT


Mark Tangard wrote:

Hi Pam. Yes, I'm generally of the same mind; but this is a case of only
very light editing -- mostly just changing a few numbers in the tables
and a few words in the text; so our goal in choosing between the two
methods is to maximize the file's stability through many saves (probably
dozens daily over the course of a few years), given it'll be a very
large file and may have several hundred "sections" which in itself can
make a file temperamental.

To answer your earlier question, yes, it's likely to be very very long,
perhaps thousands of pages. All tables will be the same size and
structure, none will be long enough to break across pages, and all will
be formatted to ensure they don't.


PamC via OfficeKB.com wrote:

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

[Mark Tangard[_4_]]

Thanks, Jay, that's what we needed to hear.

Jay Freedman wrote:
My vote would be for section breaks.

Floating objects of any kind far too easily move out of position, either with a
stray mouse move or "just because they can". We've seen floating things move to
odd locations, and even disappear because they were outside the boundaries of
any page.

As I know you're aware, a project of this sort demands frequent and multiple
backups. It would even be advisable to run a periodic check of the backups to
verify that they're trustworthy -- there's nothing worse than corrupting a
document and then finding that the backup is also corrupt.

--
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.

On Mon, 13 Apr 2009 00:23:56 -0800, Mark Tangard
wrote:


Agh, sorry, just realized the question on length wasn't from Pam, but from
grammatim.

So gang, given that the text-wrapping pattern Suzanne mentioned isn't an issue
for this doc (see earlier post), which method do you think would give us the
most, um, emotionally secure file?

MT


Mark Tangard wrote:


Hi Pam. Yes, I'm generally of the same mind; but this is a case of only
very light editing -- mostly just changing a few numbers in the tables
and a few words in the text; so our goal in choosing between the two
methods is to maximize the file's stability through many saves (probably
dozens daily over the course of a few years), given it'll be a very
large file and may have several hundred "sections" which in itself can
make a file temperamental.

To answer your earlier question, yes, it's likely to be very very long,
perhaps thousands of pages. All tables will be the same size and
structure, none will be long enough to break across pages, and all will
be formatted to ensure they don't.


PamC via OfficeKB.com wrote:


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