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.