Hello Christian Christian Wittern <cwitt...@gmail.com> writes:
> On 2012-01-20 05:03, Jambunathan K wrote: >> "side-by-side" has surfaced in the list for the second time, I think it >> deserves to be supported "out of the box". > I strongly support this, since I have a lot of files with side-by-side > content. The first question is of course how does the org source look > like. I think laying out tables either "list tables" (or for that matter, it's "beamer equivalent") will become particularly "inconvenient" to edit. In both the cases, the two-dimensional structure is laid out along the single-dimension and it would become difficult to "remember" which column or row when one is editing at a given point in time. > In my case, I have simply separated the columns by a <tab> character > and set the tab-width to a sensible value for nice on-screen display. > These are 'text' and 'translation of that text' side-by-side, When you are saying on-screen display, I presume you are referring to the Emacs screen? I have a strong feeling that you are using two column editing. Otherwise, it would be extremely difficult to keep one's sanity. See C-h k C-x 6 2 (info "(emacs) Two-Column"). I have a wild-thought. Why not use use 2C editing for creating multi-paragraph Org tables. I am Ccing Nicolas (who is likely to have thought more about this stuff) since the last conversation. > sometimes interrupted by section headers, notes and so on. Therefore I > end up with multiple 'tables', which will need to have the same width > throughout the document. Therefore for this use-case, I would like to > see a global setting for the relative width of these columns. --
