Better Table engine? Or to be considered: A real spreadsheet engine as table alternative ... after all these years?

[Wookbert]

Describe the feature you'd like

I use tables in Bookstack A LOT. There are unfortunately quite a few limitations:

• no scrollbars = no option to go beyond page width = limited number of columns, due to limited width
• with no scrollbars come no optionally fixed header lines
• no interactive method to adjust width/height of multiple selected columns/lines at once in order to be identical in size
• no option to drag and re-sort entire columns or lines
• no sorting options
• no real option to paste formatted table contents sourced e.g. from Excel or Google Sheets
• and: no calculations (not expected ... but still would come very handy)

@ssddanbrown Can’t you switch the table engine or add an alternative one? Why not implement a JavaScript Spreadsheet Engine like e.g. JSpreadsheet CE, Handsontable, DHTMLX Grid or Webix Grid ... instead or as alternative? While being commercial libraries it looks to me as if they all are also available in free community editions for integration in non-commercial open source application like Bookstack.

Describe the benefits this would bring to existing BookStack users

My above described limitations are described in countless other issues: #1387, #4522, #5743, #1652 (interesting ... created by myself 6 years ago), #1574, #2126, #4716, #5717, #4944, #1367, #315, #1518, #1492, #3475 and the list goes on.

IMO many users, including me, are eagerly and yearningly awaiting a fundamental improvement on the tables front since years and the applause and sighs of relieve would be long and loud.

Can the goal of this request already be achieved via other means?

No.

Have you searched for an existing open/closed issue?

• I have searched for existing issues and none cover my fundamental request

How long have you been using BookStack?

Over 5 years

Additional context

No response

[ssddanbrown]

Hi @Wookbert,

Ultimately it comes down to scope of support. Adding anything more complex broadens the scope to maintain that complexity. This would be especially true of a spreadsheet engine as that would take on a wide new element which would bring its own requests, desires and support needs.
Ultimately I'm not confident it's worthwhile for the project to also become a spreadsheet engine, that's probably better done via a dedicated application (and potentially embedded into BookStack content if really needed).

Why not implement a JavaScript Spreadsheet Engine like e.g. JSpreadsheet CE, Handsontable, DHTMLX Grid or Webix Grid ... instead or as alternative? While being commercial libraries it looks to me as if they all are also available in free community editions for integration in non-commercial open source application like Bookstack.

From a quick look all those are non-starters based on their licensing alone, either not being compatible with our permissive license or being open core which I wouldn't be keen to rely on.
Either way, It's not just a drop-in usage. As long as it's officially and properly integrated, we'll end up assuming responsibility of these elements so support will end up on me/us, and there's still a lot of consideration in regard to working-well/integrating with the required features of BookStack.
Even then, we'd have to consider the potential impact of taking on the efforts of maintaining the functionality ourselves in the event it stops being maintained, or there's a fundamental change upstream, where forward compatibility would be needed. This is something we're currently experiencing with the main WYSIWYG editor, which has required a lot of effort, in addition to other parts such as codemirror languages. That would be a massive burden on the project.

Ultimately, I do want to improve the experience of tables, and maybe the move to our own WYSIWYG editor will help with options there, but a lot of the direct solutions to issues raised have trade-offs or issues of their own relative to other fundamentals of the platform, and therefore are not an overall win. Some I feel are best left to non-official customizations so trade-offs have to be considered. Maybe we could better formalise a range of customizations on our hacks site?

Tables though are a fundamentally complex and awkward structure, and often when looking deeper into the more complex issues around them, I come away thinking that alternative layouts/structures would be better suited in general.

[zhang-nianqiang]

Some I feel are best left to non-official customizations so trade-offs have to be considered. Maybe we could better formalise a range of customizations on our hacks site?

We can't meet everyone's needs, but I think a plugin-like format can give everyone the opportunity to fulfill their own wishes.

[Wookbert]

@ssddanbrown As always: Thanks for your swift reply and honest words!

I'm not a programmer, I’m just a passionate user – and unfortunately those stupid tables are essential to nearly every BookStack page I create. Whenever I begin a new documentation and it comes to creating a table (e.g. to collect data or make a hardware, software, component comparison, ...) I’m standing at the crossroads between having everything neatly in one place in BookStack, but running into getting bloody fingers with those TinyMCE tables, or using Google Sheets and adding a text link (which is a bit annoying, because it’s not in plain sight and requires some additional organizing on the Google Drive).

In most cases I start with the TinyMCE tables, but as it is a work in progress and I’m for instance not knowing how many columns I end up with, creating an appealing result is really a time-consuming challenge, where at certain point I ask myself „Heck, why didn’t I went down the Google Sheets road this time“. I seldomly need its mathematical features, but the way to edit and organize the table is much, much more convenient.

So, yes I stand by my request ... a better table editor or table something is needed. I dunno... Either by building your own engine (perhaps you could »borrow« some code from the mentioned commercial OS projects) or perhaps by elegantly implementing a Google Sheets viewer right into BookStack pages, something which seamlessly blends in. I totally understand: It’s quite a challenge ...

On those JavaScript table engines again: I’ve mentioned just a few which look cool to me (SheetsJS might also be worth a look). Perhaps there’s something out there which fits. Perhaps it’s not a spreadsheet engine, but a dumb, yet more powerful table engine.

A few more candidates (quick collection, not reviewed in depth by me):

• Grid.js
• https://github.com/bennyboer/table-engine | Demo ... no updates since 2022
• Tabulator
• DataTables
• Tanstack Tables ... no clue what this is
• MUI X Data Grid
• Bootstrap Table
• vue-good-table

[zhang-nianqiang]

Every problem actually has many solutions.
In my opinion, before online editors offer better table support, you can try changing your workflow.
For example, use an offline editor to process the entire document and then copy it into the online editor. Although this method may not necessarily work for you, it is perhaps one of many solutions.
You should be able to find other solutions that suit you.

[Wookbert]

@zhang-nianqiang

We can't meet everyone's needs

We? I’m not quite sure what your role in the BookStack community is – at least I can’t find your profile in the Top 100 list of development contributors.

you can try changing your workflow. … You should be able to find other solutions that suit you.

Your comments sound overly ambitious, however are no helpful at all. My feature request is a respectful reminder and constructive criticism from me as whole-hearted BookStack user and supporter, that tables are a fundamental element of Wiki-style editing/documentation as in BookStack, yet the current TinyMCE table engine lacks features and a certain degree of convenience, and come with major limitations (such as the page width limit without scrollbars), which users are knowingly dealing (and struggling) with since years (see the not even complete list if issue numbers in my OP above).

I – like probably many here, who are constantly working/juggling with tables in BookStack – am craving for something which gives me less of a headache and a bit more fun, and saves me time, rather than taking it.

[Wookbert]

@ssddanbrown Thought about it again... A useful, yet not overly complex (sorry if I’m naive) improvement of the situation might be the already mentioned Inline Viewer for Google Sheets. So instead of a text link to a Google Sheets document, a (height-adjustable) area with scrollbars, which shows the Sheet title and the cells area minus the toolbar(s). Fully viewable and cells selectable for copying, but no editing. For editing a pen icon next to the Sheets Document title takes you to the Google website and opens the Sheets. No idea whether this can be done.

[virtadpt]

What about embeddability of something like PySpread? It has a pretty solid REST API as I recall from my limited experiments a while ago.