Personally, I think they should have used a fluid layout to begin with if using tables, replacing fixed pixel with percentage based width in all width settings throughout the page. Then the tables would have resized regardless of resolution and there wouldn't be a problem.
Although I would agree with comments offered previously that given the size of the site, there should be a template, or they should have used CSS to simplify changes to the layout, regardless of what the situation may be in that respect, if they used fixed pixel width in tables throughout the site, those width settings are absolute and there's nothing you can do with it except fix each one, unless the tables in question are all applied in the template.
As for the cost of revisions, without looking at the pages I'd be hard pressed to offer an opinion in that respect. But, their project scope presents only 10 pages of revisions a day. Unless those pages are loaded with numerous tables to sort out of code and revise, that seems a little far fetched to me. I would think they should be able to accomplish a wee bit more than that in a day!
Regardless... I would suggest that you inquire about their setting up a CSS driven template and converting the pages to template while making the needed revisions, if they are fairly consistent in layout, so that should you ever want to make revisions to the site again, you don't have to deal with 780 pages again, you simply deal with one!
|