On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Alan Braslau wrote:
On Wed, 8 Mar 2017 16:29:52 +0100
Henri Menke <henrime...@gmail.com> wrote:
Natural Tables are quite handy but their syntax is a little verbose.
\bTABLE
\bTR
\bTD ... \eTD
\eTR
\eTABLE
There exist nice extensions which make the format less verbose by
mapping
\startTABLE
\NC ... \NR\NR
\stopTABLE
back to the original macros.
The new method for tables, called xtables, is faster and seems to
have less problems than Natural Tables. However, the syntax is even
more verbose
\startxtable
\startxrow
\startxcell ... \stopxcell
\stopxrow
\stopxtable
Can we have similar abbreviations as for Natural Tables?
Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder, but I have always found the
syntax of the older table macros to be quite unreadable, somewhat a
left-over from laTeX-like syntax.
The xtables syntax is verbose, indeed, but much more readable and much
better in line with other ConTeXt syntax.
It depends. For numerical tables, the old syntax is easier to read.
\startTABLE
\NC Parameter \NC value 1 \NC value 2 \NC value 3 \NC \NR
\NC 1.0 \NC 3.4 \NC 3.6 \NC 4.2 \NC \NR
\NC 1.0 \NC 3.4 \NC 3.6 \NC 4.2 \NC \NR
\NC 1.0 \NC 3.4 \NC 3.6 \NC 4.2 \NC \NR
\stopTABLE
For textual tables, or for generating tables programmatically using CLD,
the start-stop syntax is more convenient.
Aditya
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the
Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
