On Fri, 11 Mar 2016 09:36:01 +0100 Pablo Rodriguez wrote:

Sorry, Mica, but which is the gain in nesting sections (whether possible or not) over using subsections and subsubsections?

I can hardly imagine the sense in the point you’re making. (Sorry, it must be my fault.)

Think about including source in another source, for example. Say one has an article that becomes a book, or gets included in a book, or the book gets parts. In the course of writing, one might decide to add an additional level of structure and not want to change all of the \start...\stop structure definitions. In fact, using fixed section, subsection, subsubsection is a bit antiquated, isn't it? Alan

Indeed, Hans, it would be nice to be able to nest sectionlevels within a chapter...section... scheme (which is NOT depreciated, although antiquated). Currently, \startsectionlevel will by default start a chapter. One would like it to start a section if located within a chapter, a subsection, if located within a section, etc. This should be possible. Alan On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 09:05:49 +0100 Procházka Lukáš Ing. wrote:

Hello,

one more thing:

It would be nice to allow mixing:

- \section like commands (or \startsection ... \stopsection) - AND \startsectionlevel ... \stopsectionlevel.

The main problem is that one may NEED to mix:

- (ancient) source files which use \section (deprecated) style - with more versatile \start-\stopsectionlevel style in newer source files.

See the test attached - only the case 3 works universally with the \start-\stopstructurelevel; any mixing of sectioning styles doesn't yield a desired result.

Best regards,

Lukas

On Sat, 12 Mar 2016 01:53:18 +0100, Alan BRASLAU wrote:

...

On Fri, 11 Mar 2016 09:36:01 +0100 Pablo Rodriguez wrote:

...

Sorry, Mica, but which is the gain in nesting sections (whether possible or not) over using subsections and subsubsections?

I can hardly imagine the sense in the point you’re making. (Sorry, it must be my fault.)

Think about including source in another source, for example.

Say one has an article that becomes a book, or gets included in a book, or the book gets parts. In the course of writing, one might decide to add an additional level of structure and not want to change all of the \start...\stop structure definitions.

In fact, using fixed section, subsection, subsubsection is a bit antiquated, isn't it?

Alan ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________

-- Alan Braslau CEA DSM-IRAMIS-SPEC CNRS UMR 3680 Orme des Merisiers 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette cedex FRANCE tel: +33 1 69 08 73 15 fax: +33 1 69 08 87 86 mailto:alan.braslau@cea.fr

On Tue, 15 Mar 2016 18:10:27 +0100 "Thomas A. Schmitz" wrote:

But don't let anyone tell you that explicit names are "antiquated." They make TeX or xml source documents so much more readable! And when you have to retrace five levels of \startsectionlevels because you want to change the structure of your document, you will rue the day you abandoned proper names.

When you want to change the structure of your document when using structure levels, all that you need do is add or subtract a level of nesting. With named levels, it is easy to create complicated documents that jump around in level, which would be pretty messy. What a nightmare it would be to add or subtract a named structure level in a complicated document. This being said, I still mostly use named structure levels myself, as old habits are hard to change (but don't tell Hans this!). Alan

On 3/15/2016 6:10 PM, Thomas A. Schmitz wrote:

On 03/15/2016 05:54 PM, Alan BRASLAU wrote:

...

Indeed, Hans, it would be nice to be able to nest sectionlevels within a chapter...section... scheme (which is NOT depreciated, although antiquated).

Oooh, shiny! In the TEI community, there are also people who repeat that having <div>s all the way down is modern, and <div1><div2> etc. is old hat. Well, I like to think about the way I structure my texts before I write them. I'm old fashioned that way...

But seriously: by all means, let's allow nesting. But don't let anyone tell you that explicit names are "antiquated." They make TeX or xml source documents so much more readable! And when you have to retrace five levels of \startsectionlevels because you want to change the structure of your document, you will rue the day you abandoned proper names.

they are not antiquated at all the main benefit from using \startchapter ... \stopchapter instead of \chapter is that we then know where something end which is handy when you want to finish things before starting something new (esp when grouping is involved it can get messy otherwise) ... it's also easier on the export Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------

Yes that looks like what I want. Thank you! On March 11, 2016 1:43:27 AM PST, Hans Hagen wrote:

On 3/11/2016 9:08 AM, mica@silentumbrella.com wrote:

...

Greetings,

Is it possible to have

\starttext

\startchapter Hey a chapter! \startsection something.one \startsection someting.one.one \startsection something.one.one.one \stopsection \stopsection \stopsection

\stopchapter

\stoptext

render as:

1. Hey a chapter! 1.1 something.one 1.1.1 something.one.one 1.1.1.1 something.one.one.one

do you mean something like

sections/levels-001.tex sections/levels-002.tex

in the test suite?

\starttext

\startstructurelevel [title=first top level]

\startstructurelevel [title=first lower level] \startstructurelevel [title=second lower level] \startstructurelevel [title=third lower level] test \stopstructurelevel \stopstructurelevel \stopstructurelevel

\startstructurelevel [title=first lower level] \startstructurelevel [title=second lower level] \startstructurelevel [title=third lower level] test \stopstructurelevel \stopstructurelevel \stopstructurelevel

\stopstructurelevel

\stoptext

and \starttext

\startstructurelevel [title=first top level]

\startstructurelevel [title=first lower level] \startstructurelevel [title=second lower level] \startstructurelevel [title=third lower level] test \stopstructurelevel \stopstructurelevel \stopstructurelevel

\startstructurelevel [title=first lower level] \startstructurelevel [title=second lower level] \startstructurelevel [title=third lower level] test \stopstructurelevel \stopstructurelevel \stopstructurelevel

\stopstructurelevel

\stoptext

----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl ----------------------------------------------------------------- ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________