Thread: Are 's displayed in TOCs?
I am almost done with the PL/pgSQL doc revamping.
Are <sect3>'s displayed in tables of contents? I have <sect3>s that
would be much more appealing and useful to readers if they were displayed
in the TOCs.
If <sect3>'s won't be displayed, would it be ok for me to re-structure
some PL/pgSQL topics into <sect1>s with <sect2>s ?
-Roberto
--
+----| http://fslc.usu.edu USU Free Software & GNU/Linux Club|------+
Roberto Mello - Computer Science, USU - http://www.brasileiro.net
http://www.sdl.usu.edu - Space Dynamics Lab, Web Developer
Why trying to DRINK and DRIVE, while you can SMOKE and FLY?
Roberto Mello wrote: > > I am almost done with the PL/pgSQL doc revamping. > > Are <sect3>'s displayed in tables of contents? I have <sect3>s that > would be much more appealing and useful to readers if they were displayed > in the TOCs. You can alter this in the stylesheets. If you have an nwalsh-modular directory there is a dbautoc.??? file. Near the top of this are two figures for the depth of the ToC - one for books, one for articles. You can almost certainly override this sort of stuff on the command-line but I haven't succeeded in doing so yet. > If <sect3>'s won't be displayed, would it be ok for me to re-structure > some PL/pgSQL topics into <sect1>s with <sect2>s ? > > -Roberto
Roberto Mello writes: > I am almost done with the PL/pgSQL doc revamping. > > Are <sect3>'s displayed in tables of contents? Not the way we have it set up, although it could be changed. However, this makes the ToC unreasonably long in many cases, so I'd hesitate to change it, at least now. > I have <sect3>s that > would be much more appealing and useful to readers if they were displayed > in the TOCs. > If <sect3>'s won't be displayed, would it be ok for me to re-structure > some PL/pgSQL topics into <sect1>s with <sect2>s ? This is probably the best approach anyway. Too many "important" sect3's make the page too long. -- Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net http://yi.org/peter-e/