The ten decisions that shape a dining room.

Nothing on the site lets a client choose a seat count directly. Capacity numbers do appear, but only as prose describing the table a given whole-room arrangement happens to fit — four-to-six for one pattern, six-to-eight for another, a larger table for a third — sized to the house archetype, never offered as its own decision. Expandable doesn't map to a capacity ladder anywhere either; the nearest content is a general extendable furniture option, which resizes one piece rather than naming a seating range.

Round versus rectangular is a real, live choice inside the whole-room dining layout tool, driven by circulation clearance rather than pure aesthetics — the two shapes are offered as alternate candidate arrangements for the same house type, across several house archetypes. Oval and square aren't modelled anywhere as selectable options — oval appears only inside notes describing individual showcase images, and square doesn't appear for a dining-sized table at all. This is whole-room-arrangement content, not a registry decision set with its own usage/cost/visual triplet.

A furniture-flexibility decision compares single-purpose, stackable, folding, extendable and modular pieces, each with a full usage/cost/visual writeup — extendable, folding and modular are close matches for three of this decision's four options, and single-purpose covers fixed. It's real and live, but the tool itself is built for ELS's StayReady rental furnishing service: it answers a general furniture-flexibility question that applies equally to a sofa bed or a storage bench, not a dining-table-specific comparison.

This is the best-covered of the ten. The dining layout-pattern library names kitchen-adjacent, a central or middle-zone position, a separate formal room, and a kitchen/living edge with an explicit island-or-peninsula variant, as real, distinct, live arrangements browsable across house archetypes. Beside-a-window isn't itself a distinct position in this library, though — daylight is treated as a rule layered onto whichever position is chosen, not a fourth selectable option alongside the other three.

Individual chairs versus a bench is a real, live choice inside the same layout tool: one pattern explicitly allows a bench or wall-side seating on one side as mixed seating, and a dedicated pattern replaces chairs on one side with a wall bench specifically because a loose table with chairs all round blocks circulation. Banquette isn't modelled as an option anywhere on the site — the word appears exactly once, describing what one specific showcase image happens to show, rather than naming a selectable seating type.

Nothing compares pendant, chandelier, track, recessed and layered lighting as fixture-type alternatives for a table. The closest-named content answers a different question: one set compares general, layered and cove-LED lighting schemes for the living room, sharing only the word layered; another compares surface-mounted, recessed, track-mounted and a coordinated service slot as ceiling mounting methods for a living-room TV wall, sharing recessed and track in name only, and it isn't currently visible either. Individual showcase images of a pendant or chandelier over a dining table exist, but as single inspirational pictures, not a structured, client-facing comparison.

One decision set, scoped specifically to dining and not superseded, has a single comparison sheet depicting four configurations — a low buffet wall, a glass-fronted display hutch, an open appliance or coffee niche, and a pocket-door concealed appliance bay — matching sideboard, display cabinet, dry bar and concealed pantry respectively. Authored and closely matched, it simply isn't visible to a client yet.

One decision set is real and live today — adjustable, fixed or sliding, for the divider between any two rooms — which covers a sliding partition directly and a permanently fixed divider as the nearest match for a separate, enclosed room. A companion set would add the screened half of this question — clear, reeded or frosted glass, or a solid panel — but it isn't currently visible. Neither set includes a genuinely fully-open, no-partition option; both assume a divider of some kind already exists.

Floor finish and visible acoustic treatment are both real, live decision sets — but both are catalogued for the living room, not dining, so citing them here means borrowing content authored for an adjoining space. Rug isn't modelled as an option anywhere, consistent with rugs being explicitly scoped as client-supplied decor elsewhere on the site, and ceiling treatment fares no better: the closest match is also living-room-scoped and isn't currently visible either.

Power and switch points is a real, live, room-agnostic decision — moving from a standard socket layout to planned density-and-position, USB-integrated plates, or smart/dedicated circuits. It covers wall sockets well but never mentions a floor-mounted socket. Movable is one of the options in the same furniture-flexibility decision cited under table size and extension, above, which partially answers movable furniture — but a floor socket at a fixed table position, and a multifunction table, aren't named as options anywhere on the site.