From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carsten Dominik Subject: Re: spreadsheet: column width behavior(s) Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 21:53:34 +0100 Message-ID: <1E0F2C3A-5F85-42BA-9232-3CB3DE4CDAFB@gmail.com> References: <4BABBF44.5020803@alumni.ethz.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NvHVc-0002P0-TX for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 17:56:04 -0400 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=41380 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NvHVa-0002Nl-PL for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 17:56:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NvHVU-0005hI-CR for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 17:55:57 -0400 Received: from ey-out-1920.google.com ([74.125.78.147]:29997) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NvHVU-0005hB-7Z for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 17:55:56 -0400 Received: by ey-out-1920.google.com with SMTP id 4so886715eyg.34 for ; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 14:55:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4BABBF44.5020803@alumni.ethz.ch> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Michael Brand Cc: Org Mode 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