spreadsheet: column width behavior(s)

spreadsheet: column width behavior(s)

[Michael Brand]

Hi Carsten, hi all

Are there reasons to only narrow but not to widen columns?

I would like the behavior `fixed width' like

| year | boss                          | facility management assistant  |
|      | <30>                          | <30>                           |
|------+-------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| 2009 | Alice                         | Bob                            |

but with the current implementation get

| year | boss  | facility management assistant |
|      | <30>  | <30>                          |
|------+-------+-------------------------------|
| 2009 | Alice | Bob                           |

which widens the column only if there is too less space left for the column 
content.

As a comparison I can imagine four variants:
<..40>   : `maximum width' (what <40> is today)
<30>     : `fixed width'
<20..>   : `minimum width' (no narrowing)
<20..40> : `width range' (minimum 20, up to 40, narrowing if even longer)

The most commonly used spreadsheet applications offer just one single variant 
out of the above four (right?) and it is `fixed width'. My vote for org-table 
would be the same: That it should support `fixed width' and that this is 
sufficient as the only variant. What is the opinion of other users?

- Michael

Re: spreadsheet: column width behavior(s)

[Carsten Dominik]

On Mar 25, 2010, at 8:53 PM, Michael Brand wrote:

> Hi Carsten, hi all
>
> Are there reasons to only narrow but not to widen columns?

I think this is really the only thing that makes sense.  Why would
you want it any wider, given the limited amount of screen real
estate we have here?  I don't think it would be difficult to make
it behave the way you request, but I don't think I would ever
use widening fields.  When would you want to use this?

- Carsten

>
> I would like the behavior `fixed width' like
>
> | year | boss                          | facility management  
> assistant  |
> |      | <30>                          |  
> <30>                           |
> |------+------------------------------- 
> +--------------------------------|
> | 2009 | Alice                         |  
> Bob                            |
>
> but with the current implementation get
>
> | year | boss  | facility management assistant |
> |      | <30>  | <30>                          |
> |------+-------+-------------------------------|
> | 2009 | Alice | Bob                           |
>
> which widens the column only if there is too less space left for the  
> column content.
>
> As a comparison I can imagine four variants:
> <..40>   : `maximum width' (what <40> is today)
> <30>     : `fixed width'
> <20..>   : `minimum width' (no narrowing)
> <20..40> : `width range' (minimum 20, up to 40, narrowing if even  
> longer)
>
> The most commonly used spreadsheet applications offer just one  
> single variant out of the above four (right?) and it is `fixed  
> width'. My vote for org-table would be the same: That it should  
> support `fixed width' and that this is sufficient as the only  
> variant. What is the opinion of other users?
>
> - Michael
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode

- Carsten

Re: spreadsheet: column width behavior(s)

[Michael Brand]

>> Are there reasons to only narrow but not to widen columns?
> 
> I think this is really the only thing that makes sense.  Why would
> you want it any wider, given the limited amount of screen real
> estate we have here?  I don't think it would be difficult to make
> it behave the way you request, but I don't think I would ever
> use widening fields.  When would you want to use this?

I see, there _are_ reasons for `maximum width' (and other variants would be 
only additional if ever).

The variant `fixed width' can be useful for the following timetable. Here it 
is achieved with the field content
`<=      widen'
in the last row.

several columns with the same width:

|-------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------|
|       | Mon       | Tue       | Wed       | Thu       | Fri       |
|-------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------|
|  8:15 | Math      | Compute=> | -         | Math      | Compute=> |
| 13:15 | -         | Math      | Compute=> | -         | Math      |
|-------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------|
| /     | <9>       | <9>       | <9>       | <9>       | <9>       |
| /     | <=     => | <=     => | <=     => | <=     => | <=     => |

instead of:

|-------+------+--------------+--------------+------+--------------|
|       | Mon  | Tue          | Wed          | Thu  | Fri          |
|-------+------+--------------+--------------+------+--------------|
|  8:15 | Math | Computer S=> | -            | Math | Computer S=> |
| 13:15 | -    | Math         | Computer S=> | -    | Math         |
|-------+------+--------------+--------------+------+--------------|
| /     |      | <12>         | <12>         |      | <12>         |

or even:

| Mon |  8:15 | Math             |
| Tue |  8:15 | Computer Science |
| Tue | 13:15 | Math             |
| Wed | 13:15 | Computer Science |
| Thu |  8:15 | Math             |
| Fri |  8:15 | Computer Science |
| Fri | 13:15 | Math             |

Re: spreadsheet: column width behavior(s)

[Carsten Dominik]

On Mar 27, 2010, at 2:11 PM, Michael Brand wrote:

>>> Are there reasons to only narrow but not to widen columns?
>> I think this is really the only thing that makes sense.  Why would
>> you want it any wider, given the limited amount of screen real
>> estate we have here?  I don't think it would be difficult to make
>> it behave the way you request, but I don't think I would ever
>> use widening fields.  When would you want to use this?
>
> I see, there _are_ reasons for `maximum width' (and other variants  
> would be only additional if ever).
>
> The variant `fixed width' can be useful for the following timetable.  
> Here it is achieved with the field content
> `<=      widen'
> in the last row.
>
> several columns with the same width:
>
> |-------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------|
> |       | Mon       | Tue       | Wed       | Thu       | Fri       |
> |-------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------|
> |  8:15 | Math      | Compute=> | -         | Math      | Compute=> |
> | 13:15 | -         | Math      | Compute=> | -         | Math      |
> |-------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------|
> | /     | <9>       | <9>       | <9>       | <9>       | <9>       |
> | /     | <=     => | <=     => | <=     => | <=     => | <=     => |
>
> instead of:
>
> |-------+------+--------------+--------------+------+--------------|
> |       | Mon  | Tue          | Wed          | Thu  | Fri          |
> |-------+------+--------------+--------------+------+--------------|
> |  8:15 | Math | Computer S=> | -            | Math | Computer S=> |
> | 13:15 | -    | Math         | Computer S=> | -    | Math         |
> |-------+------+--------------+--------------+------+--------------|
> | /     |      | <12>         | <12>         |      | <12>         |
>
> or even:
>
> | Mon |  8:15 | Math             |
> | Tue |  8:15 | Computer Science |
> | Tue | 13:15 | Math             |
> | Wed | 13:15 | Computer Science |
> | Thu |  8:15 | Math             |
> | Fri |  8:15 | Computer Science |
> | Fri | 13:15 | Math             |


Yes, thinking more about it, I do agree that a fixed width makes a lot  
of sense as the application of <N>.  It does now work like this.

Thanks!

- Carsten

Re: spreadsheet: column width behavior(s)

[Michael Brand]

> Yes, thinking more about it, I do agree that a fixed width makes a lot 
> of sense as the application of <N>.  It does now work like this.

Thank you for changing.  And if someone wants `maximum width' I hope that it 
will be implemented with the syntax <..N> as a _variant_ _additional_ to the 
existing <N>.

Comparison of four variants (the last two rather useless apart from showing 
the completeness of the syntax):
<30>     : `fixed width'   (the only variant implemented now)
<..40>   : `maximum width' (as wide as necessary but max. 40)
<20..>   : `minimum width' (as wide as necessary but min. 20)
<20..40> : `width range'   (min. 20, then up to 40, narrow only if > 40)

Re: spreadsheet: column width behavior(s)

[Carsten Dominik]

On Mar 27, 2010, at 6:15 PM, Michael Brand wrote:

>> Yes, thinking more about it, I do agree that a fixed width makes a  
>> lot of sense as the application of <N>.  It does now work like this.
>
> Thank you for changing.  And if someone wants `maximum width' I hope  
> that it will be implemented with the syntax <..N> as a _variant_  
> _additional_ to the existing <N>.


No, I am now convinced that this is not at all needed.  Fixed is best  
and just fine.

Thanks!

- Carsten


>
> Comparison of four variants (the last two rather useless apart from  
> showing the completeness of the syntax):
> <30>     : `fixed width'   (the only variant implemented now)
> <..40>   : `maximum width' (as wide as necessary but max. 40)
> <20..>   : `minimum width' (as wide as necessary but min. 20)
> <20..40> : `width range'   (min. 20, then up to 40, narrow only if >  
> 40)

- Carsten

Re: spreadsheet: column width behavior(s)

[Samuel Wales]

Hi Michael,

Org tables already use up horizontal space with the | syntax.  Some
people use large fonts or small displays.

Whatever solution is chosen, making it easy to make tables narrow will
be important.

Samuel

On 2010-03-25, Michael Brand <michael.brand@alumni.ethz.ch> wrote:
> Hi Carsten, hi all
>
> Are there reasons to only narrow but not to widen columns?
>
> I would like the behavior `fixed width' like
>
> | year | boss                          | facility management assistant  |
> |      | <30>                          | <30>                           |
> |------+-------------------------------+--------------------------------|
> | 2009 | Alice                         | Bob                            |
>
> but with the current implementation get
>
> | year | boss  | facility management assistant |
> |      | <30>  | <30>                          |
> |------+-------+-------------------------------|
> | 2009 | Alice | Bob                           |
>
> which widens the column only if there is too less space left for the column
> content.
>
> As a comparison I can imagine four variants:
> <..40>   : `maximum width' (what <40> is today)
> <30>     : `fixed width'
> <20..>   : `minimum width' (no narrowing)
> <20..40> : `width range' (minimum 20, up to 40, narrowing if even longer)
>
> The most commonly used spreadsheet applications offer just one single
> variant
> out of the above four (right?) and it is `fixed width'. My vote for
> org-table
> would be the same: That it should support `fixed width' and that this is
> sufficient as the only variant. What is the opinion of other users?
>
> - Michael
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
>


-- 
Q: How many CDC "scientists" does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: "You only think it's dark." [CDC has denied a deadly disease for 25 years]
==========
Retrovirus: http://www.wpinstitute.org/xmrv/index.html

Re: spreadsheet: column width behavior(s)

[Carsten Dominik]

On Mar 27, 2010, at 7:05 PM, Samuel Wales wrote:

> Hi Michael,
>
> Org tables already use up horizontal space with the | syntax.  Some
> people use large fonts or small displays.
>
> Whatever solution is chosen, making it easy to make tables narrow will
> be important.

I think the new implementation (<> means fixed width N characters) does
still fulfill this request.

- Carsten

>
> Samuel
>
> On 2010-03-25, Michael Brand <michael.brand@alumni.ethz.ch> wrote:
>> Hi Carsten, hi all
>>
>> Are there reasons to only narrow but not to widen columns?
>>
>> I would like the behavior `fixed width' like
>>
>> | year | boss                          | facility management  
>> assistant  |
>> |      | <30>                          |  
>> <30>                           |
>> |------+------------------------------- 
>> +--------------------------------|
>> | 2009 | Alice                         |  
>> Bob                            |
>>
>> but with the current implementation get
>>
>> | year | boss  | facility management assistant |
>> |      | <30>  | <30>                          |
>> |------+-------+-------------------------------|
>> | 2009 | Alice | Bob                           |
>>
>> which widens the column only if there is too less space left for  
>> the column
>> content.
>>
>> As a comparison I can imagine four variants:
>> <..40>   : `maximum width' (what <40> is today)
>> <30>     : `fixed width'
>> <20..>   : `minimum width' (no narrowing)
>> <20..40> : `width range' (minimum 20, up to 40, narrowing if even  
>> longer)
>>
>> The most commonly used spreadsheet applications offer just one single
>> variant
>> out of the above four (right?) and it is `fixed width'. My vote for
>> org-table
>> would be the same: That it should support `fixed width' and that  
>> this is
>> sufficient as the only variant. What is the opinion of other users?
>>
>> - Michael
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
>> Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
>> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
>> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Q: How many CDC "scientists" does it take to change a lightbulb?
> A: "You only think it's dark." [CDC has denied a deadly disease for  
> 25 years]
> ==========
> Retrovirus: http://www.wpinstitute.org/xmrv/index.html
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode

- Carsten