We use "nested spreadsheets" that can live in any cell, and combined with aggregate functions like GROUP_BY() we're able to get this behavior.

Would be genuinely curious -- would our approach [1] help w/what you're working on?

[1] Here's an example of how we think about multiple dimensions in spreadsheets (videos + text): https://mintdata.com/docs/learn/core-mechanics/work-with-dat...

That’s very interesting, but to be perfectly honest it’s almost the exact opposite of how I’d tend to think of things whilst building or manipulating a model. I don’t want to offend anyone, but it feels baroque, like something bolted-on, and it kind of breaks the whole “spreadsheet extruded into arbitrary dimensions” (cube) metaphor.

(Such as how in the accursed Excel, at least up to the last version I was blighted with having to use, one couldn’t take a cell of a Pivot table as the input to another formula elsewhere.)

Just watched the video. I think it is a different approach. The spreadsheets in the video seem row-oriented. It goes more in the direction of a relational database. CubeWeaver is multidimensional, so you don't need a group by function. You can group by a dimension just by creating a new worksheet with less dimensions and copying the data from the original worksheet using a formula. You can also group by an attribute using the JOIN function.

As an aside, what did you find missing from XCubes (not affiliated anyway, but I've often thought about building a similar product as Javelin or Quantrix, but sitting on top of JupyterLab).

Have you had a chance to check out Quantrix Qloud? Its basically Modeller in the browser, with reduced functionality, though the team is working to expand the feature set each release.

Call me quaint, but I despise software hosted in a cloud and/or accessed through a browser.

I don't think a multidimensional spreadsheet (like Lotus Improv) makes sense for a single user. Multidimensionality introduces a lot of complexity and it is only justified by very complex models. Apart from some special cases this complexity is only there when at least 5-10 people are entering the data. Web application is much easier to rollout in a corporate environment. And I don't see any drawbacks. I don't have MS Office for example and use only Google Sheet for a long time already.

As a single power user of such software, I assure you that multidimensionality is a characteristic of the data and not a feature that’s convenient only once one has multiple users.

The classic product/channel/geography relationship is one of those. There’s a myriad others.

Besides, Improv had many other positive features beyond multidimensionality (including the separation between data and formula).

It's usually a company-specific interpretation of software validation requirements (imposed by regulators) that software cannot be changed (ie updated) outside of the company's control. Web apps are fine as long as the company can host and perform upgrades/maintenance themselves.

Uhm, no. I assure you the powers-that-be in my firm would totally lose their marbles if highly reserved data were crossing out into some web-app hosted who-knows-where and viewable by who-knows-who.

If you choose the on-premise options no data will ever leave your company. Administrators will install the software on a server inside your company and will be responsible for updates, backups and security of the server.

That’s a “more workable” solution.

Still, again, as a power user... native applications are hard to beat.

It's what I meant by "host".

A native application is a stand-alone, non-electron application whose entire stack (runtime, business logic, data engine, and information store) resides on the user’s machine.

‘Hosted’, to me at least, means that you’ve got an augmented web server somewhere on your intranet that you connect to, and that displays its interface through a browser on the user’s machine.

The two terms are mutually exclusive, in my understanding (except of course when one is speaking explicitly of “hosting a web server”, but I’m sure you catch my drift).

Still sounds company-specific to me! Not every company is like that.