Unable to split tables in LO writer

users
#1

When I insert a table in LO writer it immediately starts at the top of the
next page as though a page break is inserted before the table. This
frequently leaves a lot of white space where the free flowing text finishes
and the table starts: it does not look very elegant and pushes up printing
costs. It only seems to happen when the table is bigger (longer) than the
remaining space on the page.

Does anybody know how to stop this so the table starts immediately after
the free flowing text so there is no white space and the table splits across
two or more pages?

I am using Libre Office Version: 4.2.5.2 build ID:
6ff819b65674ae6c83f3cbab9e4a4c2b292a7a94 on Windows 7 Ultimate with service
pack 1.

Best wishes,

Stephen Harding

Freelance author

Telephone desk 01256 781557

Telephone mobile 07969 469543

Skype Shirley_and_Stephen_Harding

#2

When I insert a table in LO writer it immediately starts at the top of the next page as though a page break is inserted before the table. This frequently leaves a lot of white space where the free flowing text finishes and the table starts: it does not look very elegant and pushes up printing costs. It only seems to happen when the table is bigger (longer) than the remaining space on the page.

That's exactly why it occurs, of course - on the assumption that you want the table kept in one piece.

Does anybody know how to stop this so the table starts immediately after the free flowing text so there is no white space and the table splits across two or more pages?

Go to Table | Table Properties... | Text Flow (or right-click | Table... | Text Flow) and tick "Allow table to split across pages and columns". You may also want to tinker with "Allow row to break across pages and columns" for specific rows of the table.

Alternatively, you may need to remove the tick from Break (at the same place) if a page break before the table is your problem - but that doesn't quite fit your description of the symptoms.

I trust this helps.

Brian Barker

#3

What does the Text Flow register of the Table Format dialog say? (RightClick
into the table, chose "Table ..." from context menu)

HTH
Nino

#4

Yes. Your problem is slightly different: since you have "Keep with next paragraph" ticked, the table is being taken over to the following page so that it is not separated from what may immediately follow it. Removing that tick should solve your difficulty.

Brian Barker

#5

Hello,
I've been using autofill and noted some things, not so much bugs but queries about the way it works and if it could be better.

1) I enter (e.g.) 2, 4 and 6 into cells B1-B3
2) I then highlight these cells and use autofill to extend to B4-B9, and I get 8,10,12,14,16,18 in these cells - exactly as expected.
3) If instead I extend only to B6 (but leave the selection in place), I get 8,10,12 in those cells.

4) I can then resume the extension to B9, and get 14,16,18 in B7-B9 - as in (2). Again as expected.

Here's where the fun starts:

5) Instead of 2, 4 and 6, I enter 2, 4 and 7 into cells B1-B3.
6) I use autofill to extend to B4-B9 as before. I get 3,5,8,4,6,9 in B4-B9.

#It took me a little while to work out what is going on (when I noticed this I was using less related numbers and wasnt extending so far, so the pattern was less obvious). It seems that each of the cells B1-B3 is incremented by 1 to obtain the fill values for B4-B6, then again for B7-B9.
7) If I repeat step (3) with these values, I get 3,5,8 in cells B4-B6. BUT:
8) when I resume extension to B9, I don't get 4,6,9 but I get 3,5,8 repeated.
#This strikes me as very odd indeed.

Q: Is there a logical reason for this behaviour? Wouldn't it be better if Calc were to use differences and obtain the values 11,16,22,29,37,46 to fill B4-B9?
Aside: I notice Excel doesn't cope well with this situation either - it produces some (fractional values which I haven't analysed).
In any case, surely step 8 should return the same result as step 6 (?).
(OK, that's 3 questions!)

9) starting with a sinle cell, say, 2 in B1, and extending using autofill, the 2 is incremented to 23,4,5.... etc., i.e. there is an assumption that the increment should be 1. Strictly speaking, it should be 0, since a single value doesn't have an incremental value. To obtain a column containing the same figure in all cells, it is necessary to enter the same value twice into adjoining cells.

Q: Is there a good reason for this? It seems to be the wrong way round: after all, to obtain an increment of 2, I would have to enter two values differing by 2 (similarly 3, or any other number); logically by extension to get an increment of 1 it should be necessary to enter two values differing by 1 (and that is exactly how it works in Excel: if I autofill from a single cell, I get that cell's value duplicated throughout the autofill selection).

Something to think about, anyway!

Best,
/Gary

#6

I've been using autofill and noted some things, not so much bugs but queries about the way it works and if it could be better.

No answer to your general points, but a few comments:

9) starting with a single cell, say, 2 in B1, and extending using autofill, the 2 is incremented to 23,4,5.... etc., i.e. there is an assumption that the increment should be 1.
Strictly speaking, it should be 0, since a single value doesn't have an incremental value. To obtain a column containing the same figure in all cells, it is necessary to enter the same value twice into adjoining cells.

Two points here:
o It is generally bad practice to repeat the same value a number of times: it can be a recipe for mistakes. If you need the same value in multiple rows, it should appear in any necessary formula either as a constant or a reference to single cell elsewhere. Having it in a separate cell also makes it easier to modify, if that becomes necessary.
o If you really do want to autofill cells without increment, you can do so by holding down Ctrl whilst dragging the fill handle.

In addition, you can do cleverer things by first selecting the result range and then using Edit | Fill > | Series... .

I trust this helps.

Brian Barker

#7

Hi :slight_smile:
i guess different people might expect different patterns. Most of the ones
given in Gary's post make total sense to me. Generally i avoid leaving it
to any spreadsheet program to try to guess what pattern i want. Usually 3
values is enough to define a simple arithmetic progression but 4 values is
helpful to just make absolutely certain.

I think you can go into the configurations to define ones you personally
commonly use. For example when i tried studying fractal dimensions and
chaos theory it might have been handy to have some interesting ones just to
see my lecturer raise his eyebrows. Now i just live in permanent chaos and
never expect patterns to work out for me.
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#8

Thanks Brian and Tom for your answers.

I often use calc as a simplified database, where Base would be an overkill, and there I would often want several successive cells (vertically, corresponding to several records) to have the same value.
Another problem is that it also works on strings which end in a number, so if I have "string001" and use autofill, I get "string002, string003" etc.
I guess sometimes this can be useful and sometimes not. Your tip for holding down control should help there, too.

And I still think it's inconsistent - the 'wrong way round!'
I'll check out edit>fill sometime, it sounds interesting.

Thanks again
/Gary

#9

Hi,
Wikipedia defines leading zero as follows:

"A leading zero is any 0 digit that comes before the first nonzero digit in a number string in positional notation.[1] For example, James Bond's famous identifier, 007, has two leading zeros."

However, if I put '7' in a cell and select format 2 leading zeroes, I get '07'.
LO gives one leading zero too few.

/Gary

#10

Hi Gary,

If you use the excel notation "00"#, you get your 2 leading zeros. But
you're right, it's a bug. The formatting should be right
automatically. For once, the MS notification is right :wink:

Met vriendelijke groeten, Salutations distinguées, Kind Regards,

DRIES FEYS
CORPORATE SERVICES • Specialist Software Developer

TVH GROUP NV
Brabantstraat 15 • BE-8790 WAREGEM
T +32 56 43 42 11 • F +32 56 43 44 88 • www.tvh.com
Watch our company movies on www.tvh.tv

#11

I think the only problem is the "leading zeros" definition.
The function itself is correct, but it has to be intended as "number of
digits of the cell, filled with leading zeros"

Federico Quadri

Dries Feys <dries.feys@tvh.com> ha scritto:

Hi Gary,

If you use the excel notation "00"#, you get your 2 leading zeros. But
you're right, it's a bug. The formatting should be right
automatically. For once, the MS notification is right :wink:

Met vriendelijke groeten, Salutations distinguées, Kind Regards,

DRIES FEYS
CORPORATE SERVICES • Specialist Software Developer

TVH GROUP NV
Brabantstraat 15 • BE-8790 WAREGEM
T +32 56 43 42 11 • F +32 56 43 44 88 • www.tvh.com[1]
Watch our company movies on www.tvh.tv[2]

Hi,
Wikipedia defines leading zero as follows:

"A leading zero is any 0 digit that comes before the first nonzero
digit in a number string in positional notation.[1] For example, James
Bond's famous identifier, 007, has two leading zeros."

However, if I put '7' in a cell and select format 2 leading zeroes, I
get '07'.
LO gives one leading zero too few.

/Gary

Link: