[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [O] setting local variables

From: Carsten Dominik
Subject: Re: [O] setting local variables
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 11:58:09 +0200

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 11:39 AM, Rasmus <address@hidden> wrote:
Carsten Dominik <address@hidden> writes:

>> I believe this change was made to fix the case of mixed numbered and
>> unnumbered headings in the TOC.
>> Please see the other thread[1] where I suggest supporting the "case 3"
>> where we want TOC where all headings are numbered i.e. the case of num:nil.
> This would address my main concern and make it usable, yes.
> It is another question if the association of unnumbered and not toc-listed
> is a useful one in general.  The cleanest would be to have properties like
> NO_TOC_LISTING and NOT_NUMBERED or so to allow local control.  Conflating
> it with the global switches I find a bit confusing.


To support an UNNUMBERED and "UNTOCED" entry in ox-latex /in general/, we
would need to have something like KOMA-Script’s \addsec.  Alternatively,
one can manually add \addcontentsline{toc}{LEVEL}{NAME}, but these are not
indented (see https://tex.stackexchange.com/a/212439/3878).  Also, headers
aren’t updated, though this is less of a concern.

Otherwise, this can only be archived by setting the secnumdepth counter to
a sufficiently low value (say 0 for unnumbered chapters) in which case
everything below that number is also unnumbered.

Hi Rasmus,

yes, I am aware that LaTeX does use unnumbered for this, but this is backend specific implementation, and not an argument about the logic of this approach.



I almost cut my hair, it happened just the other day

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]