On 12/24/21 9:49 AM, Denis Maier via ntg-context wrote:

For the six = for the toc...

...

Denis Maier via ntg-context hat am 24.12.2021 18:42 geschrieben:

Can't you just define a default structurelevel scheme and a default combined list for the six. If a user redefines the structure level scheme, they will just redefine the combined list as well. Would that work?

Denis

The way the user specifies TOC depth in Org is e.g. "#+OPTIONS: toc:2". All exporters support that method. Jason

On 12/24/21 1:48 PM, Denis Maier via ntg-context wrote:

Anyway, I agree that a solution via hierarchy levels would be nice.

That's what I'm hoping to achieve. I'm not familiar enough with low-level ConTeXt to do something like this but it seems like it ought to be possible.

...

You don't do that. If you provide default a default sectionlevel scheme, you'll know what toc:2 means. If a user uses a different scheme provided via #+Context_Section_Levels you can use that to adjust the meaning of toc:2. But if a user uses the default setting toc:2 should be fine. Does that make sense?

I understand. The issue I see is that this introduces a coupling between section structure and table of contents that could be confusing for users, and also makes the interface more complicated by adding another keyword. I am trying to take advantage of the flexibility of ConTeXt for most of the configuration, because a user is more likely to be familiar with ConTeXt than with my specific elisp module. Jason

On 12/24/2021 5:45 PM, Jason Ross via ntg-context wrote:

Dear list,

Is it possible to set the maximum table of contents depth to a number rather than providing an explicit list of section names?

Background:

I am developing an exporter for Org mode. In Org, users can specify the number of levels they want in the table of contents with a number. I currently do this by having the sectioning commands be known to the exporter so I can generate a command like     \setupcombinedlist       [content]       [list={section,subsection}] for n=2.

I'm considering using  \start/stopsectionlevel for sectioning commands instead. That way, users could add \definesectionlevels to the document preamble to use whatever sectioning scheme they wanted. However, this would mean that the exporter wouldn't know what sectioning commands to use the TOC setup. given the amount of reactions i added a simple levels feature ... the best i can do for now is:

\placelist[chapter,section,subsection][levels=2] keep in mind that all should work with the already present selective placement and filtering (criterium) uploaded ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------