5

As described in my other question (see there for some background), I need replacements for some Firefox addons which should work with v57+ – i.e. they should be Web Extensions. In this case here, my question is about TableTools. Requirements:

  • allows to sort a table by a column either numerical or alpha-numerical (must-have)
  • filter tables by a column value (e.g. "Name" equals "Miller", "Age" is below 50, "City" contains "ton"). At least by one column, combinations preferred
  • export the (resulting/marked/all) rows as CSV (other formats welcome, especially Markdown)

While TableTools has a ton of additional features, these 3 are my must-haves. Some of its other features are welcome (eg. hide columns, rearrange their order by drag-and-drop), most of them I don't care much about (if they're there its OK, but I wouldn't really miss them).

TableTools
TableTools filter feature (source: AMO)

TableTools
TableTools context menu (source: AMO)

As the addon works on page content only, it could also be realized as a UserScript – which would be fine with me, too. Gratis, preferably open-source.

0

2 Answers 2

0
+50

Seeing that you look for 50 different addons in total and chances are low that you will find a perfect replacment for every single one of them, may I suggest a different strategy?

Rather than searching replacement addons, you could keep your beloved addons in Firefox forks dedicated to the pre-webextension area addons.

Examples:

"Waterfox Classic is continuing to support the long-standing XUL and XPCOM add-on capability that Firefox removed in version 57."

"Continues add-on support for XUL, XPCOM, and NPAPI plugins, all of which are no longer supported in Firefox."

4
  • 1
    I'm actually using Waterfox Classic (a.o. for the given reason) – but more and more sites are becoming more or less unusable with it as they implement the latest Chrome stuff (like WebAssembly etc) which Classic cannot support. WF Current (and later, like G3/G4) no longer fully support XUL. And Pale Moon is even behind WF Classic. So no: while this was a temporary work-around, it's not solving my issue. Thanks nevertheless!
    – Izzy
    Jan 16 at 23:39
  • @Izzy: Ok, sorry I didn't know that. I thought it was worth a try. Pale Moon works fine for me, but your mileage differs apparently. At any rate, I feel for you, the situation is really painful. The old addons were wonderful.
    – summerrain
    Jan 17 at 17:00
  • 1
    So they were (and partly still are). And you couldn't know, it's more than 4 years since I asked the question. I'm glad to see some of my favorite addons are revived, even if it requires several hoops to use them (like TabMixPlus for example). But some seem certainly lost – like this one…
    – Izzy
    Jan 17 at 17:37
  • 1
    @ "favorite addons are revived": yes, but the webextensions seem to be much more limited in their capabilities
    – summerrain
    Jan 17 at 17:42
0

Have you tried the Table Capture addon for Firefox?

It doesn't do all the tricks you want, but from my personal experience its table recognition capabilites are even superior to TableTools, as it recognizes a lot more different table structures (not just tables but also tables, and really complicated other table-like structures). And once you the table is recognized, you can copy it to your favourite spreadsheet app and execute your requested actions there. (Sorry, I know you want it directly in your browser, but that's at least better than nothing.)

It seems to have disappeared from mozilla.org recently, but you can get it from archive.org

PS: In reply to your comment: I am using it without a subscription. The free version is very effective. The paid version has additional features but I have not checked them out, so I cannot report on those.

4
  • 1
    Thanks for the suggestion – but no, I really want it in the browser. Having to load another heavy tool just for sorting is too much overkill for "quickly checking something". Apart from that, it seems to be subscription based. // Might be useful for other users though, so thanks for the answer!
    – Izzy
    Jan 17 at 17:40
  • I was referring to the free version. I clarified that in my answer. I understand (and mentioned that in my answer) that it would be more comfortable in the browser, I just thought I'd give you a heads-up, since it's still better than having no addon at all ...
    – summerrain
    Jan 17 at 17:47
  • 1
    Yes, thanks! But as outlined, while some tasks could be covered with that, I'd most likely rather skip those tasks as "too troublesome". I need it inline, not "copy around". (and this is not critisizing, just stating why it's not for me).
    – Izzy
    Jan 18 at 23:21
  • 1
    @Izzy thanks for the feedback
    – summerrain
    Jan 21 at 21:07

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.