Re: Placing Abstract and Sotd in table of contents

Thanks for implementing this.  I was in the middle of doing it too, so I 
will stop!

I had thought to use lower-case romans for the intro sections, but I 
agree that it is weird.  I will revert my changes and test yours out.

On 9/7/2011 2:11 PM, Robin Berjon wrote:
> On Sep 7, 2011, at 19:15 , Shane McCarron wrote:
>> I was recently asked by the PFWG to ensure the Abstract and Sotd are in the ToC.  This doesn't seem like it is normal W3C house style, so I certainly wouldn't do it as a default.  However, would anyone object to my adding this as an option?  Otherwise I am going to have to mark up the ReSpec-based PFWG documents by hand!
> Since I had my hands still in there when I got this email, I made a change that supports this.
>
> TL;DR: You can set tocIntroductory to true in your spec's configuration and it should DTRT.
>
> What happens under the hood is that sections with class=introductory, which are ignored for the ToC by default (that class is automatically added to SotD and Abstract), now get included (but not numbered, because it seemed weird). This means that documents which had added other such front material using class=introductory will now show up in the ToC too when this option is enabled. Hopefully that's not an issue (people not using this won't see any difference).
>

-- 
Shane McCarron
Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc.
+1 763 786 8160 x120

Received on Wednesday, 7 September 2011 19:22:07 UTC