Welcome to WebHeadStart.org

Web Technologies

Sponsored By

WebHeadStart.org is currently in beta.
Please pardon our appearance as we work to provide you with the most comprehensive reference on today's web technologies.

Interested in advertising on WebHeadStart? Become an advertising partner today!

[WWW-HTML Mailing List Archive Home] [Messages By Thread] [Messages By Date]

Re: Sortable tables

From: Orion Adrian <orion.adrian@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 09:35:05 -0400
Message-ID: <abd6c8010508300635d89f4c4@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-html@w3.org

On 8/30/05, Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl> wrote:
> Orion Adrian schreef:
> >> There is nothing to stop browser manufacturers implementing this today!
> >> (and for HTML too)
> >
> > Actually given the tight intergration of presentation and semantics in
> > tables via colspan and rowspan this would be nearly impossible to do
> > correctly all the time. Say someone had a table like so:
> >
> > <table>
> > <tr><td>A<td>B<td>C<td>D</tr>
> > <tr><td>1200<td>1600<td>1900<td>400</tr>
> > <tr><td>$1,200<td colspan=3>N/A</tr>
> > </table>
> 
> Aside from that the headings are not marked up as such, I don't see a
> direct problem here for sorting (although there is one for column
> reordering). There is a slight problem with rowspans though.
> 
> I see two ways to sort tables with rowspans:
> 1. For the purpose of sorting, the cells with a rowspan could just be
> 'expanded' to n separate cells. When they end up next to eachother
> again, they can be re-combined.
> 2. The sorting can consider the rowspanned cells to be 'grouped'. That
> means the rows those cells are in are only moved as a whole. The values
> inside the group are also sorted. Like 'group by' in SQL.
> 
> I think solution 2 is the best one.
> 
> I am the first to admit that rowspan and colspan aren't the easiest to
> deal with when considering sorting capabilities, but I do think they
> convey important, structural/semantic information. To say that they are
> making things 'nearly impossible' is not true at all. The sorting just
> needs to be done more intelligently compared to 'plain vanilla' tables
> without column/row spanning.

My example was the wrong example, but column reordering is also a
problem. Especially with sorting since it is often useful to reorder
columns after a sort to put the primary sort key as the first column.

The question is can you produce an algorithm that can intelligently
determine between 1 and 2 above? There will always be situation now
where 1 or 2 is the wrong approach. I have yet to find a method that
clearly indicates where one is a better solution in any given
situation.

-- 

Orion Adrian
Received on Tuesday, 30 August 2005 13:36:33 GMT
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS! Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | WebHeadStart.org © 2005 All Rights Reserved.