emacs-orgmode
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [O] Bug: Org 9.2.1 table issues [9.2.1 (9.2.1-dist @ /Users/nick/.em


From: Nick Helm
Subject: Re: [O] Bug: Org 9.2.1 table issues [9.2.1 (9.2.1-dist @ /Users/nick/.emacs.d/lisp/org-9.2.1/)]
Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2019 08:48:53 +0000

Thank you for your response.

Nicolas Goaziou <address@hidden> writes:

> Nick Helm <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>> The column is no longer right aligned. 
>
> This is by design, so you can often edit the field without expanding the
> column.

I'm not sure I follow. Are you saying the ability align cell contents in
a shrunk column has been purposefully removed from 9.2?

If that's the case, it's a significant loss of functionality. This would
mean, for instance, that it's no longer possible to format financial
data with a uniform column width.

>> In the last table above, continuation / truncation / shrunk cell
>> characters (…) display even though the column is the full specified
>> width (40 char in this case) and no cell text is truncated. I expect
>> continuation to only show when text is actually truncated.
>
> I think this is a matter of taste. 
>
> Of course, this is slightly more informative, but I prefer a more
> visible "…" character. It might be confusing otherwise, e.g., if you
> edit a narrow column, which suddenly expands because a very large column
> below.

The choice of continuation character is indeed personal preference, but
the character's presence on non-truncated cells is not. It's misleading
and ambiguous.

Let me try to illustrate with another example. If you shrink this table
with C-c TAB:

| <5>                      |
| one                  two |
| one                      |

you get the following:

| <5> …|
| one …|
| one …|

This is misleading - cell 3 contains no additional content yet the
indicator says it does. It's also ambiguous - it's impossible to
determine whether cell 2 or 3 contains the longer field.

Compare with this, where such information is clearly conveyed:

| <5>  |
| one …|
| one  |

I wouldn't describe this difference as a matter of taste. This is a
feature that previously existed (substitute "=>" for "…" in the table
above and you have the result in 9.1). Has this been removed from 9.2 as
well?

Nick


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]