Tables

[Steve Hoelzer]

> If you go for it, I'd argue that the columns should still be denoted

> by a single pipe instead of requiring doubles. Then a regular table

> can be converted to one with colspans easier. Maybe double pipes mean

> colspan?

>

> Eg.

>

>     [ Table 2: Test of a complex table                  ]

>

>     |            | Imported       | Domestic            |

>     |            | Beans || Peas  | Carrots || Tomatoes |

>     |            | ----- || ----- | ------- || -------- |

>     | Wholesale  | $1.00 || $1.25 | $1.20   || $1.20    |

>     | Retail     | $2.00 || $3.00 | $1.80   || $1.80    |

>


Or, maybe indicate colspan just in the cells that should get colspan.
Use multiple pipes at the right edges of cells that should be spanned.

Eg.

   [ Table 2: Test of a complex table                ]

   |            | Imported     || Domestic          ||
   |            | Beans | Peas  | Carrots | Tomatoes |
   |            | ----- | ----- | ------- | -------- |
   | Wholesale  | $1.00 | $1.25 | $1.20   | $1.20    |
   | Retail     | $2.00 | $3.00 | $1.80   | $1.80    |

I realize that this puts extra characters for formatting, but I really
like that the rest of the table looks exactly like a normal,
non-colspanned table. It's also going to get pretty ugly when the cell
needs to span, say, 7 columns.

Just an idea. Hopefully someone can improve on it.

Steve