2014-02-15 16:19 GMT+01:00 Michael Brand <michael.ch.brand@gmail.com>:

> What about this?:
>
> |--------------+------+-----|
> | activity     | Time | sub |
> |--------------+------+-----|
> | Activity A   |    3 |     |
> |--------------+------+-----|
> | Activity B   |    5 |  34 |
> | Activity C   |    2 |  34 |
> | Activity D   |    7 |  34 |
> | Activity E   |    8 |  34 |
> | Activity F   |   12 |  34 |
> |--------------+------+-----|
> | Activity 1   |    9 |  18 |
> | Activity 2   |    2 |  18 |
> | Activity 3   |    4 |  18 |
> | Activity 4   |    3 |  18 |
> |--------------+------+-----|
> | Activity I   |   23 | 111 |
> | Activity II  |   51 | 111 |
> | Activity III |   37 | 111 |
> |--------------+------+-----|
> |              |  163 |     |
> |--------------+------+-----|
> #+TBLFM: @>$2 = vsum(@<<<..@>>) :: @<<<$3..@>>$3 = vsum(@-I$2..@+I$2)
>

It is certainly a big step in the right direction. I have to study it to
understand what it does. (You also changed the part I already had. I have
to look to see why that is better.)

There are a few problems with it:
- As your example shows, the first element is not filled and when the
first range only has one element ...
- I would like to have only the last element of the range filled.

But it is certainly helpful: thanks.

-- 
Cecil Westerhof