Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
Are Tables Required Or Not?
CodeTRUCKER:
Again my real question is if tables can be eliminated as a tool in data storage/presentation?
-CodeTRUCKER (February 28, 2014, 12:12 PM)
--- End quote ---
OK, thanks for clarifying. I'd break down your question a bit further. There are two underlying assumptions there: 1) that there is (or should be) just one general way of working with data for everyone (with or without tables), and 2) that it is necessary or desirable to have all the solutions present in one single software.
-dr_andus (March 01, 2014, 04:49 AM)
--- End quote ---
Well, given I need to do global searches often, splitting up my data collection is not really tenable, so yes, I do need to have all my data in a single repository.
Concerning 1), I'd say that people's information-related tasks vary so much that one workflow (working with or without tables) will never cover everyone's needs. Concerning 2), there may be benefits for using two or more different systems together to cover a workflow.
So it should be possible to use an information management (IM) software that does not have good support for tables most of the time, and occasionally resort to software that specialises in tables for the odd table-related tasks. A decent IM software should allow you to import the table somehow (as text or as image) or at least link to the file with the table, so it can be launched from within the IM, which can serve as a project hub (dashboard) for the given task group.
--- End quote ---
A valid observation, but again my need for global recall precludes multi-program schemes.
In fact this is exactly my situation. I use ConnectedText (a personal wiki) for my database and information analysis. But creating tables is a pain in CT (at least for me), so if I need to work out a problem using tables then I use Treesheets or an Excel sheet, and then I link to those files from CT or take a screenshot and insert the image into the CT document.
Similarly, since CT is mostly a text-based system, I prefer to use Surfulater for capturing and storing webpages, but if it's an important page for a particular CT document, I can link to the captured webpage in Surfulater from CT directly. So you can have your cake and eat it. ;)
--- End quote ---
I have used CT in the past (I may still have a license), but I stopped using it due to some anemia (I can't recall what?). Surfulater is a bonnie piece of kit, to be sure. If it had native table features we would probably not be having this conversation. ;) One of my favorite features is the intelligent way it handles grabbing and formatting web sites. Out of the box, I clipped a forum thread on turbine engine performance and settings for a DeHavilland Twin Otter. Surfulater somehow intelligently excluded the superfluous junk and present the thread in a concise format that was far more enjoyable to read.
But if tables are crucial for you, why not make a software that is strong with tables the centre of your system, and use other 'satellite' software to complement the tasks that it might not cover? In fact wouldn't InfoQube fit the bill?
--- End quote ---
InfoQube, eh? It has been a long time since I have read that name. Unfortunately, my gimpy memory will not release the details of my involvement at present. I will have to return to the scene of the crime to re-familiarize myself.
CodeTRUCKER:
Meanwhile, back at the ranch...
I have been thinking about the larger question of this thread. I have been thinking of (1) what a table really is and why it was, is used? I have also been questioning (2) what is really happening with tabulated data? Now, I'm no great thinker, but (at least for me) this exercise has helped me to reduce the subject to a finer granularity and has allowed me a more objective consideration. Read on.
(1) The first thought I had was a table is convenient. It stores/presents related data in a matrix that is both familiar and efficient. I think this is because its function is reinforced by its form. Even the visual framework allows us to quickly navigate the data in a well-seasoned procedure. Our eyes lead our minds around the grid for whatever purpose. Tables are as comfy as our favorite chair, but mainly for graphically-oriented people which appears to be the vast majority of humankind. On the other hand, the familiar arrangement of tables may turn out to be a prison for textually-oriented folk. They are locked behind the bars of the grid lines without freedom of their minds to work in their behalf. The table, like a movie inexorably leads us wherever the film maker wants us to go. Perhaps tables imprisons all of us? This leads me to the next bullet.
(2) In consideration of the dynamics of tables and the interactions of the user, the table is a collection of relationships. But, it does not necessarily follow that all those relationships *must* be kept in proximity.
[Note: to the Reader: I must admit that at this point I get kind of fuzzy trying quantify these dynamics, but I will a least try to communicate my thoughts. Please don't ridicule me if I can't make things coherent. At this juncture I am only working through the theory of my cogitations.]
As I looked at a table I saw separate entities within the matrix (no pun intended). Associations specific to various entities tried to emerge, but was never really able to overcome the gravitational forces of the table. However, this does not mean those associations could not live outside the table, but this did provoke a question of whether the different associations "needed" each other to remain coherent? Is it possible the groups of associations did not necessarily require the table, but only needed a different proximal relationship to maintain their vitality?
Well, that's as far as I got this go-around. Keep in mind, I am trying to communicate a "picture" which briefly surfaced and returned to the depths without revealing its true and comprehensive form. I can kind of "see" what I am trying to say, but I can't put into words or concrete application just yet. I hope you all do not think me mad? :huh:
tomos:
Tables are, as you say, limited. They're very limited in fact.
An outline within a table offers more possibilities.
Following up on what dr_andus described as an IM "that is strong with tables".
Think outline, tables, the possibility to show items in multiple locations, filtering, etc. etc.
Think of a family shown in an outline, children will be shown under each parent and parents will be shown under grandparents.
Are Tables Required Or Not?
or,
every person can be shown at the top level, with children as, eh, child items, which means many people are shown multiple times.
Are Tables Required Or Not?
This is using InfoQube. It is very powerful - I'm only a basic user myself, I struggle myself sometimes with e.g. the hierarchy/display options. What I'm trying to say is: that strength comes with a highish-learning-curve price.) Basic filtering is easy, very complex filtering is possible but not (yet) easy.
I linked spouses to each other. You could also create other subitems, related to each character and choose to show these or not. There is also a HTML pane where you can add further text (tables even!), etc, etc.
TaoPhoenix:
...
A valid observation, but again my need for global recall precludes multi-program schemes.
...
Well, given I need to do global searches often, splitting up my data collection is not really tenable, so yes, I do need to have all my data in a single repository.
-CodeTRUCKER (March 01, 2014, 12:23 PM)
--- End quote ---
I just try to live with an uneasy merging of info. What Excel/clones do really well is that sometimes data arrives requiring dynamic math abilities and linked pages. For me that's really hard to take out of the spreadsheet programs.
Other hobby data just lives in windows folders as various files that are hard to reconvert and merge anywhere else. I will make a small joke that I visit the same 120 hobby topics ten times a year. So I just collect misc notes, try to put really good file names on them, and run my "Drive Reader" about four times a year. Then I can just search the text file for that thing I looked at five months ago.
TaoPhoenix:
Meanwhile, back at the ranch...
I have been thinking about the larger question of this thread. I have been thinking of (1) what a table really is and why it was, is used? I have also been questioning (2) what is really happening with tabulated data? Now, I'm no great thinker, but (at least for me) this exercise has helped me to reduce the subject to a finer granularity and has allowed me a more objective consideration. Read on.
(1) The first thought I had was a table is convenient. It stores/presents related data in a matrix that is both familiar and efficient. I think this is because its function is reinforced by its form. Even the visual framework allows us to quickly navigate the data in a well-seasoned procedure. Our eyes lead our minds around the grid for whatever purpose. Tables are as comfy as our favorite chair, but mainly for graphically-oriented people which appears to be the vast majority of humankind. On the other hand, the familiar arrangement of tables may turn out to be a prison for textually-oriented folk. They are locked behind the bars of the grid lines without freedom of their minds to work in their behalf. The table, like a movie inexorably leads us wherever the film maker wants us to go. Perhaps tables imprisons all of us? This leads me to the next bullet.
(2) In consideration of the dynamics of tables and the interactions of the user, the table is a collection of relationships. But, it does not necessarily follow that all those relationships *must* be kept in proximity.
[Note: to the Reader: I must admit that at this point I get kind of fuzzy trying quantify these dynamics, but I will a least try to communicate my thoughts. Please don't ridicule me if I can't make things coherent. At this juncture I am only working through the theory of my cogitations.]
As I looked at a table I saw separate entities within the matrix (no pun intended). Associations specific to various entities tried to emerge, but was never really able to overcome the gravitational forces of the table. However, this does not mean those associations could not live outside the table, but this did provoke a question of whether the different associations "needed" each other to remain coherent? Is it possible the groups of associations did not necessarily require the table, but only needed a different proximal relationship to maintain their vitality?
Well, that's as far as I got this go-around. Keep in mind, I am trying to communicate a "picture" which briefly surfaced and returned to the depths without revealing its true and comprehensive form. I can kind of "see" what I am trying to say, but I can't put into words or concrete application just yet. I hope you all do not think me mad? :huh:
-CodeTRUCKER (March 01, 2014, 12:52 PM)
--- End quote ---
Great higher level comment! My eleven cents:
1. "What a table really is and why it was, is used?" - To me, a table is "very flat and wide data that desperately needs a 2x2 correlation to everything all the time".
So supposing for example in my tax prep job, I'd want a table of:
Last name, First Name, Last 4 of the social security number, full social security number, and client phone number ...
and then IRS acceptance status plus refund-check status.
That kind of data is a chart against which at any time a client calls in and "wants to know the last two items as fast as possible". Client calls, they give you any amount of the first five items, and you feed back the last two.
That's what a chart does. 2x2, very tall and very wide, but with a little care, *very flat*.
2. Trees
However, a whole lot of my mindset runs to very *deeply nested* data that emphasizes structure of the data.
Recreation
DonationCoder
CodeTrucker
MyInfo Investigation
Necessary Features
1 (Feature1)
Progress1
Progress 1a
Progress 1b
Solution1
2 (Feature2)
Progress2
Progress 2a
Progress 2b
Solution2
Slashdot
Aphelion
Chessbase
Article1
Notes1
Notes2
Article2
Notes1
Notes2
--------------------------------------------
And so on.
So in that broad case a table is useless because the structure rules it all, and then the rest starts to get freeform.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version