Hi Jeff,
Thanks for the input, however it does not seem we are on the same
wavelength. Maybe I should have distilled my example down even further to
solidify context, although given what I was trying to accomplish I believe
it is all in context.
At this point I am not concerned about presenting multiple sections
(agreed, looping will be important) - my emphasis right now is to present
just one piece in a manner that makes sense. As a result, I am finding
that using `spread` to convert the flat data into a "crosstab" does not.
The flat data has (IMO - at least the wider version I have locally) all the
info needed to allow a sort to be enforced, and any miscellaneous data for
that section, without having to customize each section individually (in
essence, allow for looping). With regard to sorting, in the past hour or
so I have tried the `seq` parameter (after changing `key` to the `Order`
column) in `spread`, as well as the `arrange` function after `spread` but
neither are helpful.
I have considered a leading character in the headings to force a sort, with
something to trim it from the final output, but I am not fond of that
solution. Also, having the section heading outside the table to me feels
like a waste of space. With 13 proposed sections in the end (120 to 140
observations), having that all in only two pages may already be a challenge.
--
Cheers,
Joel Maxuel
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
