Proposed table specification (long!)

[Simon Bull]

Thanks for your additional comments Fletcher.


If the proposed syntax overly complicated, I am very happy to simplify it.
The question is whether or not the following is really complicated?

~~~~~


    -----------------------------------
         THE PEOPLE OF MIDDLE-EARTH
    -----------------------------------

      People    Homeland    Tongue
    ===================================
      Elves     Rivendell,  Quenya,
                Mirkwood,   Sindarin,
                Lorien      Nandorin

      Dwarves   Erebor      Khuzdul

      Hobbits   The Shire,  Westron
                Breeland


~~~~~

Sure, if you want the rowspan and/or colspan features you will have to use
the ruled cols and/or ruled rows form.  But those are optional features that
many authors might use only rarely.  Likewise, a particular implementation
could choose to either support/not support those optional features.  But at
least there would be a potential upgrade path from the most basic table
support to the fullest table support.

The proposed specification is only verbose because I decided to illustrate
every feature individually with an explicit example.  If you prefer I could
give the entire proposal in one or two examples instead.

The issues around editors and mon-spacing are bigger than this proposal, so
I won't attempt to address those here.

Thanks again for your ever insightful comments Fletcher ,

Simon


On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Fletcher T. Penney <
fletcher at fletcherpenney.net> wrote:


> Since you asked, here are my own personal thoughts - others most

> likely disagree....

>

>

> The syntax seems a bit complicated - I didn't compare, but I suspect

> the length of your explanation approaches or exceeds the entire

> Markdown syntax guide.  I realize that you are trying to offer some

> flexibility, but that can get tricky.

>

> The other challenge is "editability" - with most of the complex table

> formats out there, it would be very tedious to actually create and

> subsequently modify a table by hand.  I will grant you that this as

> much (or more) a problem with editors than the syntax.  And one could

> create plugins for certain editors (e.g. TextMate) that could do the

> formatting for you.  But this seems to be straying outside the bounds

> of what makes Markdown so great. (Again --- just my opinion)

>

> But I think the biggest issue is the monospace vs proportional font

> problem.  This plagues every proposed table syntax out there (to my

> knowledge) --- tables just aren't going to look right in both font

> types in plain text files.  Proper alignment is a key feature of

> tables, and it's frustrating when this is destroyed by changing the

> font.

>

> That said, the elastic tabstop idea proposed by Nick Gravgaard offers

> a tantalizing solution to this problem.  In text editors that

> supported this concept, it would be trivially easy to align columns of

> text that worked for both monospace and proportional fonts.  Columns

> would automatically realign when you changed the length of a given

> cell.

>

> In general, I believe there is a trade-off between simplicity and

> functionality.  My preference is not to sacrifice (much) simplicity

> for the sake of functionality --- I believe MMD's table syntax is

> about as far down that curve as I am willing to go.  Others may be on

> the other end of the spectrum.

>

> Where true genius comes is being able to merge simplicity with

> functionality (e.g. the iphone).  I'm not saying a great solution for

> the Markdown/Table dilemma doesn't exist.  I just don't think I've

> seen it yet.  But I agree with you that continuing to generate new

> proposals is a good idea.

>

> F-

>

>

>

> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 9:22 PM, Simon Bull <waysoftheearth at yahoo.com.au>

> wrote:

> > Hi Fletcher,

> >

> > Should I assume that you mean the proposed syntax falls short in one or

> more

> > of the four categories you identified?

> >

> > If you care to elaborate on some of these short-comings I would be very

> > happy to alter my proposal in order to meet the needs of a wider

> audience.

> > That was in fact the purpose of proposing it at all.

> >

> > Thanks for your comments,

> >

> > Simon

> >

>

> --

> Fletcher T. Penney

> fletcher at fletcherpenney.net

> _______________________________________________

> Markdown-Discuss mailing list

> Markdown-Discuss at six.pairlist.net

> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/markdown-discuss/attachments/20110511/2f69c443/attachment-0001.htm>