Page talk:Southern Historical Society Papers volume 06.djvu/43

What are our options here? I've opted to attempt a nested series of Wiki Tables, which can be a PITA, if no more so than pure HTML tables. The main problem, of course, is this will transform a landscape-orientation table, into a portrait one (i.e., wide vs. narrow). It's been slow going, but I'm getting it done incrementally. I'd dearly LOVE to alter the text to make some of this easier, but I resist the temptation. If you have suggestions, please make them.

The only real alternative I can see is a free-form, continuous monospace text stream, which will recreate all the limitations of the original typewritten manuscript. What's the point of that? At the very least, Wiki (or HTML) tables will be more robust & will preserve textual integrity—Hywel Dda (talk) 18:29, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Hywel Dda, my thoughts on your points: We use many graphics and often in our other works. Some things just don't transfer from one form to another. Alter what you desire to alter, the same information will still be there. I would have just copied the original image as is often done with complex situations on en.WS. I doubt that others on WS will even bother to answer your points. They just do not care about these volumes. You yourself working on any of these volumes are a bewilderment to me after years of my having these volumes on en.WS. Kindest regards, —Maury (talk) 00:57, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

<snip> text transferred to User_talk:Hywel_Dda

I've been pondering this since I noticed your initial post a few hours ago. The text has got to remain at a reasonable size and yet the tables can't be too wide. In the end it's going to be a compromise and I can't think of any better solution than the one you've chosen. (That's not say I can't think of alternatives, but they're not better.) Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:51, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate your weighing in, Bees. One part of my solution's compromise, is that the individual Division tables are NOT going to be of the same width, because of their varying compositions, both in number of constituent Brigades, and in the space afforded names of regiments, commanders, etc. In the end, they're ALL going to be wider than I'd like, but I don't know what else to do, to preserve the hierarchical structure. Still, I'd like to hear what your thought are as to alternatives, as it may well suggest a solution that has not occurred to me—Hywel Dda (talk) 13:48, 28 August 2013 (UTC)