[Doc-SIG] field-list-table better idea than list-table

[David Goodger]

David Priest wrote:
 > IMO, too wordy.  The numbers don't add any structure to the
 > endeavour.

Obviously a difference of opinion.

 > At best, make them optional; I can see how they'd be handy in an
 > immense table, if only for the (human) reader's convienence.

The human reader's (and writer's) convenience is the whole point.

 > Mostly what I want to mention here, though, is that the above list
 > could  also be written as
 >
 >     .. list-table::
 >
 >         * Treat
 >         * Albatross!
 >         * Gannet!
 >         * Crunchy Frog!
 >
 >         * Quantity
 >         * 299
 >         * 199
 >         * 1499
 >
 >         * Description
 >         * On a stick!
 >         * On a stick!
 >         * If we took the bones out...

Note, however, that the above is a single list of 12 items.  The blank
lines are not significant to the markup.  You'd have to specify how
many columns or rows to use.

 > It depends on what we want to emphasize when we cluster the data.
 > In the former, we've packed the data for each treat into one set; in
 > the latter, we've packed the data for each category into one set.
 >
 > So we should be able to specify "column-wise" or "row-wise"
 > ordering.

Yes, that's potentially useful.

Seems to me that a list-driven table is a feature that could be done
in many ways.  Each user will have their preferred usage.  Perhaps a
single "list-table" directive could handle them all, depending on
which options and content are present.

-- 
David Goodger <http://python.net/~goodger>