Re: tables for invoice-style

[Hans Hagen <pragma@wxs.nl>]

At 10:58 AM 2/7/2003 +0000, Adam Lindsay wrote:

>Hmm, that's something else I haven't quite understood--the pros and cons
>of the three TABLE mechanisms. I've only bothered to learn \bTABLE,
>because it's closest to the HTML tables I already knew well, and because
>it was advertised as being the most powerful.
>
>Could someone who knows more than I do give a brief summary of why I
>would want either of the two other table mechanisms over the newest TABLE?

\starttable    : fast, some limitations (less spanning), based on patched TaBlE
\starttabulate : reasonable fast, no vertical lines, auto-width par's, 
split across pages
\bTABLE        : flexible, automatic, slow, no templates

so, for paragraph based tables i use tabulate, for fancy stuff i use 
bTABLE, otherwise i use table

> >(btw, some next release will have an example interface to letters and an
> >associated database)
>
>Hans, is this the same release that will include the "splitting tables
>over multiple pages" feature you've mentioned?

ah, that's mechanism number 4; already in there but undocumented -)

Hans
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE | pragma@wxs.nl
                       Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
  tel: +31 (0)38 477 53 69 | fax: +31 (0)38 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        information: http://www.pragma-ade.com/roadmap.pdf
                     documentation: http://www.pragma-ade.com/showcase.pdf
-------------------------------------------------------------------------