Merge “tabularx” and “longtable” with small patch instead of additional package just as for...
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
In this other question from 2012, a concise and functional solution has been suggested that merges tabulary and longtable into a new ltabulary.
Is there any way to adjust this patch to work for tabularx instead of tabulary as well?
Yes, for tabularx, there are ltablex and ltxtable. But if you don’t need extended features such as repeating headers, the minimal solution without an additional package, with reduced complexity, and with familiar syntax and usage is great to have, isn’t it?
Now simply replacing tabulary with tabularx in the patch does not work, as it has other constructs such as TY@final, endTY@final and TY@tabular that I don’t know the equivalent replacements for.
Perhaps one could find these in the source code for ltablex (about 99 lines apparently) or ltxtable (about 129 lines apparently).
If there are similarly concise replacements and the ported patch can be completed, it would be interesting to know how this can be done. On the other hand, it the patch requires more code for tabularx than for tabulary, one would ultimately wind up re-implementing the other two packages and this wouldn’t be worth the effort, of course.
tables longtable tabularx tabulary
asked Dec 2 at 22:40
caw
121112
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
In this other question from 2012, a concise and functional solution has been suggested that merges tabulary and longtable into a new ltabulary.
Is there any way to adjust this patch to work for tabularx instead of tabulary as well?
Yes, for tabularx, there are ltablex and ltxtable. But if you don’t need extended features such as repeating headers, the minimal solution without an additional package, with reduced complexity, and with familiar syntax and usage is great to have, isn’t it?
Now simply replacing tabulary with tabularx in the patch does not work, as it has other constructs such as TY@final, endTY@final and TY@tabular that I don’t know the equivalent replacements for.
Perhaps one could find these in the source code for ltablex (about 99 lines apparently) or ltxtable (about 129 lines apparently).
If there are similarly concise replacements and the ported patch can be completed, it would be interesting to know how this can be done. On the other hand, it the patch requires more code for tabularx than for tabulary, one would ultimately wind up re-implementing the other two packages and this wouldn’t be worth the effort, of course.
tables longtable tabularx tabulary
asked Dec 2 at 22:40
caw
121112
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
In this other question from 2012, a concise and functional solution has been suggested that merges tabulary and longtable into a new ltabulary.
Is there any way to adjust this patch to work for tabularx instead of tabulary as well?
Yes, for tabularx, there are ltablex and ltxtable. But if you don’t need extended features such as repeating headers, the minimal solution without an additional package, with reduced complexity, and with familiar syntax and usage is great to have, isn’t it?
Now simply replacing tabulary with tabularx in the patch does not work, as it has other constructs such as TY@final, endTY@final and TY@tabular that I don’t know the equivalent replacements for.
Perhaps one could find these in the source code for ltablex (about 99 lines apparently) or ltxtable (about 129 lines apparently).
If there are similarly concise replacements and the ported patch can be completed, it would be interesting to know how this can be done. On the other hand, it the patch requires more code for tabularx than for tabulary, one would ultimately wind up re-implementing the other two packages and this wouldn’t be worth the effort, of course.
tables longtable tabularx tabulary
asked Dec 2 at 22:40
caw
121112
In this other question from 2012, a concise and functional solution has been suggested that merges tabulary and longtable into a new ltabulary.
Is there any way to adjust this patch to work for tabularx instead of tabulary as well?
Yes, for tabularx, there are ltablex and ltxtable. But if you don’t need extended features such as repeating headers, the minimal solution without an additional package, with reduced complexity, and with familiar syntax and usage is great to have, isn’t it?
Now simply replacing tabulary with tabularx in the patch does not work, as it has other constructs such as TY@final, endTY@final and TY@tabular that I don’t know the equivalent replacements for.
Perhaps one could find these in the source code for ltablex (about 99 lines apparently) or ltxtable (about 129 lines apparently).
If there are similarly concise replacements and the ported patch can be completed, it would be interesting to know how this can be done. On the other hand, it the patch requires more code for tabularx than for tabulary, one would ultimately wind up re-implementing the other two packages and this wouldn’t be worth the effort, of course.
tables longtable tabularx tabulary
tables longtable tabularx tabulary
asked Dec 2 at 22:40
caw
121112
asked Dec 2 at 22:40
caw
121112
asked Dec 2 at 22:40
caw
121112
asked Dec 2 at 22:40
caw
121112
asked Dec 2 at 22:40
caw
121112
121112
add a comment |
add a comment |
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Thanks for contributing an answer to TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f462868%2fmerge-tabularx-and-longtable-with-small-patch-instead-of-additional-package%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
