[0] http://mirrors.ctan.org/macros/latex/contrib/booktabs/bookta...
The design philosophy of Great Tables
91–94 of 94 posts
Re: The design philosophy of Great Tables
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
See also https://norvig.com/Gettysburg/
According to everyone that has ever told me how to do powerpoint presentations, they need an intro slide that tells the audience what they are about to be told in the presentation they are about to be told, and a conclusion slide that tells the audience what they were told in the presentation they were told.
Sorta? I guess that might be like driving. Hands on the wheel, gas on the right, etc. But what about driving in the rain (presenting to a cold prospect)? What about driving uphill (addressing a conflict)? What about driving offroad (explaining to an irate customer what happened?
There's storytelling and communication in each of those, but they're different.
See here[1]. It does have an outline, and it does have takeaways, but there's a a structure to the story in the presentation.
It opens with "3 parts" but immediately grabs your attention with item 0. I do that because I'm presenting to engineering students, and there's some CS/ECE folks in the audience and we count from zero. Plus its fun to shake people out of "here we go, another presentation" mode.
Each part has some interesting stories and plot points. The first explains moore's law, and advances in ML / DL. You can't tell from the charts, but there's a narrative that says 2011 to 2016, we saw this advance. There's a relentless march of technology. Isn't that interesting. Part two talks through real projects, and real outcomes, and the shift in value and complexity of delivery at scale vs "we got it working on a laptop." Part three looks at the future - and calls back to pt 1, and proposes a question - what rate do you think stuff'll advance? Here's my guess. Here's some resources. Keep the convo going. Thank you. etc.
It's an incredibly fun presentation to give, and people enjoy it as well. This doesn't have the basic structure you shared, but -- it kind of does. We come back to the "agenda" pages when transitioning between the 3 sections. It has a clear punch line. And it contextualizes what we're going to talk about.
It does this, though, without having a boatload of bullet points and outlines, and, looking at it with fresh eyes, probably makes no sense without a talk track, but people seem to like it and find it useful.
Re: The design philosophy of Great Tables
#93There was some design blog post several years ago, maybe not even surfaced on HN: Creating beautiful tables both UI and UX wise, with some features being e.g dropping separator between columns (row?), doing some visual accents, etc. And yes, the most distinguished feature was that the tables weren't looking like your busy PowerPoint non-tech organisation stuff, they were very modern yet simple. I don't remember the s…
Re: The design philosophy of Great Tables
#94Many websites build tables out of div's, and they may look like tables, but they are hard to manipulate/export data from.
If a table is on a website, I feel it should be easy to export it as csv, at the least, to "free the data" :D