Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #406914
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy |
| Subject | Re: spreadsheet ergonomics |
| Date | 2017-04-08 02:11 +0000 |
| Organization | O.W.L. |
| Message-ID | <0hjz030ga.by@rooftop.invalid> (permalink) |
| References | (8 earlier) <D50D0660.9D7C4%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <ahvz93a.y03@rooftop.invalid> <D50D87A5.9D959%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <phzu9v03.abyy3@rooftop.invalid> <D50D91CA.9DA84%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 4/7/17, 6:41 PM, in article phzu9v03.abyy3@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>
> ...
>>>> in original format (26 columns, 2000 tables per column, summing
>>>
>>> 26 columns. Yes. But you do not have 2000 tables per column.
>>
>> Yes I do.
>
> Not in your images or videos. You show ONE table.
>
> ...
>
>>>> 964 MB sc file
>>>> 25 seconds to generate
>>>> 40 seconds to open
>>>> 2 seconds to jump from table 0 to table 1403999
>>>
>>> Presumably: 2 seconds to jump to A1 to ZZ27986 (or whatever) in your one
>>> table.
>>>
>>
>> No, the jump is to "table 1403999".
>
> While you show the text "table 1403999", what it shows is that text being in
> cell ZZ27986 of the one table.
>
>> The command in sc is:
>>
>> g "1403999
>
> So you have named your ranges. Cool.
>
>>>> http://imgur.com/a/5saYA
>>>
>>> What you have listed as "table 1403999" is at cell ZZ27986 of your one
>>> table.
>>>
>>> But this does lead to a good question: in your tables you have logical units
>>> of meaning which are not inherent in the table structure itself (other than
>>> as ranges). This is common. Do such units have a common name? Calling them
>>> "tables" is clearly incorrect. But what is a good name for such a set of
>>> ranges?
>>
>> Any set of tabular data can be considered a table. When you create
>> a table in Numbers, if you do not use the entire maximum column and
>> row limits, do you say that it is not a table?
>
> Do I say the table is not a table? Um, no. That would be silly. But I do not
> claim that different parts of the same table are different tables, as you
> do.
>
>> Of course you don't.
>
> Right: I call a table a table, not a range in a table a table.
>
>> But how can it be a table if you're not maxing it out?
>
> A shoe is a shoe even when your foot is not in it. A sole of a shoe does not
> become a shoe, though, even if you reference it as one.
>
>> That seems to be what you're saying.
>
> Not even slightly. I mean, really, it is not even remotely connected to
> anything I said. Hey, I said you said something about rows you did not
> (though understandably I was confused by your lack of proper terminology)...
> here you are claiming I am saying something I never did. OK. Good test to
> see if you are as honest as I am.
>
>> So given that it *is* still a table without using the all the cells, how does
>> that subset of the maximum cells anchored at A0 differ from any other subset?
>
> Assuming you mean: Given it is a table how does one range differ from
> another? If so it is because they are different ranges... in the case of
> what you are referring to they are not even overlapping ranges.
>
> If that is NOT what you mean then I would need you to explain what you are
> even trying to say.
>
You seem to have a density problem.
<quote>
From WordNet (r) 3.0 (2006) [wn]:
table
n 1: a set of data arranged in rows and columns; "see table 1"
[syn: {table}, {tabular array}]
</quote>
Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-07 09:03 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-07 09:43 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-08 00:24 +0000
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-07 18:15 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-08 01:41 +0000
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-07 18:58 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-08 02:11 +0000
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-07 20:46 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-07 21:20 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-08 05:57 +0000
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-07 23:12 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-08 06:23 +0000
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-07 23:44 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2017-04-08 07:33 +0000
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-08 00:47 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 10:28 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2017-04-09 14:00 -0400
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 11:09 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-09 11:25 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2017-04-09 22:01 +0000
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-09 15:40 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2017-04-09 15:48 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-09 22:30 +0000
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-09 15:42 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 08:45 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-10 16:46 +0000
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 09:58 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-10 19:07 +0000
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-10 12:25 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 12:36 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Mark Garcia <markymark1901z@yahoo.com> - 2017-04-10 19:44 +0000
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-10 13:00 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 12:25 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-10 19:35 +0000
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 12:37 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-10 19:47 +0000
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-10 12:57 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 13:04 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-10 20:17 +0000
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 13:27 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-10 20:43 +0000
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 13:55 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2017-04-10 22:36 +0000
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2017-04-10 16:10 -0500
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 14:18 -0700
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2017-04-10 17:01 -0500
Re: spreadsheet ergonomics Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-10 12:48 -0700
csiph-web