section breaks (again, *sigh*)

[Larry]

Windows Word 2003:

I received a document from a user. It uses section breaks to switch
between column layouts and margin sizes (though not page size). At one
point, a two-column section is supposed to be balanced and followed
immediately by a one-column section, but the section break between the
two is a page section break, so the second section starts on a new
page.

"No problem," think I. I click in the second section, go to File ->
Page Setup -> Layout, set the Section Start value to Continuous and
voila! ... Hmm.... Nothing changed. It's still a page section break.
How can that be? I try again. Nope. I think maybe I'm becoming
confused in my old age. I try clicking in the first section and
switching it from Continuous to Page. It works there, except that of
course it's affecting the wrong section. I undo, and then start
"trying things"... inserting various kinds of section breaks and
deleting others and you know the drill.

So now here's what I have managed to create: a break that functions as
a page section break, but that claims on-screen to be a continuous
section break. So that I now have two problems -- a section break
that's lying about itself, and a page section break where I still need
a continous one. Then, when I get this figured out, I've got to figure
out how to do it on a Mac (Word 2004), since that's what my user is
working on. Okay, that's three problems.

Anybody want to step in here? Suzanne? Pretty please?

 

[Larry]

A clarification: I just realised that when I change the Start Section
value, the section break type always changes to what I've asked for.
It just doesn't do it; that is, functionally I am always getting a
page break even though I'm calling for a continuous break, and even
though Word is showing the marker for a continuous break.

 

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

One common reason for this is described at "Section break causes an
unexpected page break in Word"
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=292074. You can get around this by using
the technique described at
http://word.mvps.org/FAQs/Formatting/FtnoteSpanColumns.htm

 

[Kamran]

If the two-column section is only on one page, I would simply use a two-cell
table and remove the borders. That way there's no problem if footnotes are
present, and you can just do away with the section and/or page breaks
altogether.

 

[Larry]

Thanks, Suzanne, but no joy. No footnotes in the document. I did look
at the solutions on those pages to see if maybe they could apply
anyway, but no. Any other possibilities?

 

[Kamran]

Did you see my suggestion above?

 

[Larry]

Thanks, Kamran, but the text sometimes does go onto multiple pages.
Also, it needs to wrap from left column to right column fluidly; the
table approach (which I had tried in earlier incarnations of this
document) is clumsy for that purpose.

 

[Larry]

Just following up after the weekend. Any other ideas, anyone?
TIA--

 

[Tralissa]

I have the same situation and am interested in finding a solution.
Interesting to note that when I copy the text from the document and paste in
a blank document, the section break is displayed as "next page" (different
from the original document that displays "continuous").

Some help would be appreciated.

 

[Larry]

I have the same situation and am interested in finding a solution.  
Interesting to note that when I copy the text from the document and pastein
a blank document, the section break is displayed as "next page" (different
from the original document that displays "continuous").

Some help would be appreciated.

Tralissa, I have noted that if the page dimensions are not the same
across a section break, then the section break will insist on
remaining a page section break no matter what. This might apply in
your case, as it sometimes does in mine. However, I do still have a
hard-core set of section breaks that absolutely refuse to behave
rationally -- either refusing to change, or claiming to change
(displaying as "continuous") when they actually don't.

I would really love to hear from Microsoft or an MVP on this. Any
further thoughts, Suzanne? Cindy? Rob? Anybody?