From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Charles Millar Subject: Re: Featur request org-table-iterate-table-subtree Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2015 17:58:50 -0500 Message-ID: <56660F2A.4090307@verizon.net> References: <562C2E01.5070105@verizon.net> <5658CABD.7030103@verizon.net> <878u5bbau0.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44992) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a64ku-000799-R5 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Dec 2015 17:59:41 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a64kr-00062z-Gb for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Dec 2015 17:59:40 -0500 Received: from vms173025pub.verizon.net ([206.46.173.25]:37374) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a64kr-00060r-Be for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Dec 2015 17:59:37 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.128] ([70.209.132.142]) by vms173025.mailsrvcs.net (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.32.0 64bit (built Jul 16 2014)) with ESMTPA id <0NZ000BL5FU8IDH0@vms173025.mailsrvcs.net> for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Dec 2015 16:58:57 -0600 (CST) In-reply-to: <878u5bbau0.fsf@gmail.com> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hi Aaron, On 12/03/2015 02:17 PM, Aaron Ecay wrote: > Hi Charlie, > > 2015ko azaroak 27an, Charles Millar-ek idatzi zuen: >> Any thoughts? Any body? > Well, FWIW... > > #+tblname=E2=80=99s should be unique within a document. Your probl= ems stem from > that, and your proposed solutions all work around it in some way. = I > can=E2=80=99t think of any better way to address your desired usage= than the > ones you listed (and would caution you that using narrowing to defe= at > the uniqueness assumption, while perhaps adequate for the short ter= m, is > fragile and could break at any time). > Thanks for the input. Charlie