On 07/25/2013 05:57 AM, pierre-yves.samyn@laposte.net wrote:
Hello All
Message du 23/07/13 19:46
And the original goal of my post was to figure out whether there are
people who use it, and if yes, what proportion of users (roughly), and
whether or not their use cases could be possibly fulfilled by either
named ranges or database ranges. Somehow I'm not getting any feedback
on that front.
I do user support and training for (thirty) years.
I've never met one user of this feature.
Ok. Thanks a lot for providing a data point. This helps.
However, and this goes against the opinions already given,
I found that the "automatic find label" option *is* used.
which really bothers me. We should at the very least turn this off by
default, and work toward deprecating this in the future (as Eike also
pointed out).
Any objection to that? Anyone?
Two concrete use cases (where the find label option has an advantage
over "named ranges"):
1. Managing the expansion of the range.
The formula =SUM('Sales'), where 'Sales' is the header column,
will update if you add amounts. To achieve the same result with
a "named range" you must either use a "dynamic" name (calculated)
or plan ahead more than is actually filled range.
Not currently, but the named range can be expanded to add that capability.
Having said that, the expansion of a range sounds more fit for a
database range than a named range. I'm now more leaning toward database
range as a possible replacement for the labeled range feature.
2. Adaptation of References
A table with two columns: "purchases" (column A) and "sales" (column B)
C1 =SUM('Purchase')
Copy C1 to D1 provides automatically =SUM('Sales') in D1
Good point. If we don't do this currently with named or database
ranges, we can add this capability to cover this use case.
This can not be obtained directly if "Purchase" is a named range
(and if the "find label option" is deleted/disabled).
Probably not. But if/when we implement enhanced database range, this use
case will likely be covered.
Do not get me wrong: I do not defend at all costs to maintain
this feature. I only see it is used and benefits.
This helps, as I was also looking for the missing pieces that the
labeled range provides, so that we can cover those missing pieces in the
other existing range features by extending them. Looks like it's
plausible to extend the database range to cover these missing pieces.
Thanks a lot for your feedback.
Kohei
--
Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice Calc hacker, SUSE.
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.