X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2312" "Fri" "21" "August" "92" "17:38:11" "CET" "Frank Mittelbach" "MITTELBACH@MZDMZA.ZDV.UNI-MAINZ.DE" nil "49" "Re: heading names and question" "^Date:" nil nil "8"]) Return-Path: Received: from sc.ZIB-Berlin.DE (serv01) by dagobert.ZIB-Berlin.DE (4.1/SMI-4.0/6.5.92 ) id AA08969; Fri, 21 Aug 92 17:42:18 +0200 Received: from mail.cs.tu-berlin.de by sc.ZIB-Berlin.DE (4.0/SMI-4.0-sc/19.6.92) id AA03063; Fri, 21 Aug 92 17:42:20 +0200 Received: from tubvm.cs.tu-berlin.de by mail.cs.tu-berlin.de with SMTP id AA00345 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4(mail.m4[1.11]) for ); Fri, 21 Aug 1992 17:42:18 +0200 Message-Id: <199208211542.AA00345@mail.cs.tu-berlin.de> Received: from TUBVM.CS.TU-BERLIN.DE by tubvm.cs.tu-berlin.de (IBM VM SMTP R1.2.2MX) with BSMTP id 0216; Fri, 21 Aug 92 17:42:22 +02 Received: from DEARN by TUBVM.CS.TU-BERLIN.DE (Mailer R2.07B) with BSMTP id 0215; Fri, 21 Aug 92 17:42:21 +0200 Received: from DEARN by DEARN (Mailer R2.08) with BSMTP id 4476; Fri, 21 Aug 92 17:40:40 MET Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 17:38:11 CET From: Frank Mittelbach Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project To: Multiple recipients of Subject: Re: heading names and question Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 733 > Could we get a ruling on what level 6, 7 and beyond heads should > be called in LaTeX 2.09? This is related to what they should be > called in LaTeX 3.0, but not inexorably linked (i.e., it would be > nice if they're going to have the same names in both versions, > but if LaTeX 3 completely changes naming of sectioning commands, > then I'd rather have it be more consistent with today's > interface). I personally have no idea what kind of names one can come up with if the current names are otherwise kept. But I think Don is right in asking for suggestions. Are there any? It would also be interesting to hear ideas on a completely new naming convention. Since we do need a converter from ltx209 to ltx3 sources anyway it wouldn't make any problems to switch to another set of names if we think they are superior. While we are on the topic of heading, here is another problem which is currently bothering me: In latex 2.09 the \@startsection command is heavily overloaded, suppose for example, you have a full baseline as the \parskip. Now how do you specify that the postheadskip is half a baseline skip? You don't because you can't make the postheadskip negative since this means you get a runin heading. But you have, to because the parskip gets inserted between this heading and the following text. Since I had to make such a format (looking like the bookmaster layout from IBM, for those who know that) I played around with the internal macros a bit to suppress paragraph skips after a heading. This is in principle possible but since there is no decent mechanism in latex209 for doing such tasks it is difficult. Anyway actual the question I came up with is the following: - Currently, if two headings follow each other directly, the preheadskip of the second one is suppressed completely, in other words the spacing between two directly sequenced headings is given by the postskip of the first one. My question is: is this the correct approach, or should there be a different one? To say it more explicit, I would invite you to suggest a set of parameters describing ``display headings'' + giving an algorithm for using the parameters in various circumstances. With display heading I mean headings which are separated by vertical skips from preceding and following text. Answers? Frank