Message-Id: <199402031542.AA12208@mail.cs.tu-berlin.de>
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@DHDURZ1.BITNET>
Date:         Thu, 3 Feb 1994 15:37:12 GMT
From: David Rhead <David_Rhead@VME.CCC.NOTTINGHAM.AC.UK>
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@DHDURZ1.BITNET>
To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L <LATEX-L@DHDURZ1.BITNET>
Subject:      Commands for sections and captions
Status: R

Supposing that LaTeX3 allows something like
     \section[toc entry][Running head]
             {Actual section header, maybe looonnnngggg}
could I make some further suggestions?

Suggestion: If "[running head]" is absent, the "successors to the standard
styles" should:
* measure the width of "Actual section header, maybe looonnnngggg", when
  typeset in "running head" font
* compare this width with the width available for "running head"
  in the proposed document-design
* if "Actual section header, maybe looonnnngggg" wouldn't fit in the running
  head width, act as if the user had supplied
     \section[toc entry][First few words of actual section header \dots]
             {Actual section header, maybe looonnnngggg}
  or
     \section[toc entry][Use the optional `running head' argument]
             {Actual section header, maybe looonnnngggg}
     (i.e., their typeset document contains an "error message" as the
     running head).
  Also send "You need to use the optional `running head' argument" message
  to terminal and to log file.

Similarly ...
for the successor to \caption in the successors to the standard styles ...
   \caption[lof entry] {Actual caption, maybe looonnnngggg}
If there is no [...], measure the thing inside {...} before
assuming that the user really wants it to go off to the list of figures.
E.g., some scientists:
* like 6-line captions under their diagrams
* don't seriously want 6-line entries in their list of figures.
  It's just that they've not read/understood about [lof entry]
  (and/or they don't know that they can have a caption and a legend,
  and are shoving everything into the caption).
Suitable action:
If there is a [lof entry] argument, let it through no matter how long
     "lof entry" is.  Assume that the user really wants a "lof entry" that
     long.
If there is no [lof entry]:
* Measure the width of "Actual caption, maybe looonnnngggg"
* If it is longer than the width available for a one-line entry
  in the list-of-figures:
  - act as if user had supplied
    \caption[First few words of actual caption \dots] {Actual caption, maybe
            looonnnngggg}
  - Send warning to terminal and log file.  Warning will say that
    "Actual caption" has been truncated for lof purposes, and that if the
    user really wants a multi-line entry in the list-of-figures, the user
    should supply a [lof entry] argument.

I'm not so sure about [toc entry].  Tentatively, I'd suggest that it
be treated as I suggested above for [lof entry].
However, I'll admit that the scale of the problem is less than with "toc
entry" (people are less likely to have 6-line section headings than 6-line
captions), and the probability that someone will "really want" the "toc
entry" to be identical to a long section heading may be higher than the
probability that someone will "really want" a "lof entry" to be identical
to a long caption.

If the software did some such checking, it would reduce the likelihood that
the user would need help:
*  because they got something silly in a page-header
*  because something went wrong with some text that:
   - LaTeX3 thought was seriously destined for a table-of-contents or
     list-of-figures, even though ...
   - if it actually got to the table-of-contents or list-of-figures, the
     user would realise it looked silly, and would ask LaTeX3 to send some
     [...] text instead.

                                ----------

Mike Piff made a suggestion regarding whether \section* etc.
should have an argument that forces a table-of-contents entry.

I'd suggest that such things be considered in the context of
     whether we have environments for front-matter, back-matter, etc., and
     what the "sectioning" commands are within such material

E.g.,, if one went
\begin{frontmatter}


\end{frontmatter}
it should be possible to arrange that "all top-level units in the
frontmatter environment (with the possible exceoption of list-of-tables and
list-of-figures) are to be listed in the table-of-contents", which would:
*  enforce house-style
*  save users from having to mess around specifying whether each
   individual unit (Preface, Acknowledgement, etc.) appears in the
   table-of-contents.

                                                                David Rhead