Judy wrote "..she wants each person's data to be on one web page (meaning, every person would have A to O data .., with new rows for the next person)." And Billie answered "..just tell them it can't be done the way they want." Judy's facing the traditional problem of the editor &/or publisher: Submitting authors often aren't concerned with practicalities. But, editors & publishers have to be concerned with making the information legible and, hopefully, attractive to readers. It's they who have to take the limitations of the medium into account. Judy's made the case that a 15- or 16-column table is too wide to fit onto a typical computer screen without an illegibly small font. A creative solution might be possible, but the submitter won't hear it. One approach could be "The court used a 34" wide docket book to record the information. What makes you think its presentation can be squeezed to 8 inches in exactly the same format?" In extreme cases, one may be forced to say "I am the Webmaster; the pages on this site must meet my design standards (e.g., no right-scroll). You're welcome to submit information, but I will choose the best way to present it." The disadvantage of this approach is that you seem arbitrary; the advantage is not having to argue over issues that the other can't or refuses to understand. The issue comes up from time to time in a group for whom I manage a website. Someone will ask "What will it cost to do the next new thing?" My latest answer: "Your Webmaster." -rt_/)