On 27.4.2013, at 10:52, Sebastien Vauban <sva-n...@mygooglest.com> wrote:
> Hi Carsten, > > Carsten Dominik wrote: >> On 24.4.2013, at 13:50, Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaz...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Thorsten Jolitz <tjol...@gmail.com> writes: >>> >>>> Exporting a Worg file with this header (#+TOC: headlines 2) >>>> exports the TOC twice in HTML export and ASCII export. >>> >>> If you don't specify a toc item in the OPTIONS line, Org will use the >>> value of `org-export-with-toc', which is non-nil by default. >>> >>> So, your example is equivalent to: >>> >>> #+OPTIONS: toc:t >>> #+TOC: headline 2 >>> >>> Hence you get two tables of contents. >> >> Hmm, I understand the reasoning here - but my feeling says that >> the presence of one or more #+TOC lines in a file should probably >> overrule both #+OPTIONS: toc: and the content of org-export-with-toc. >> So in that case, your would then only get one TOC, at the >> location of that line. >> >> What do you think? Are there good reasons for not doing it >> as I propose? > > Maybe what I'll say is stupid, but, in LaTeX, there's the minitoc package for > having a big TOC at the beginning of the document (default) + TOC per chapter, > which can be limited to less (or more) sublevels. > > Maybe allowing to insert extra TOC here and there would allow one to make > something like that available to other backends? Though, as of today, I don't > think the TOC is limitable per org-level-1 headline... > Hi Sebastien, I am not saying multiple tocs should not be allowed. I am all for that. However, I think that by inserting a #+TOC line, the user indicates desire for local control. Therefore, org-export-with-toc should be ignored, and, by extension, also #+OPTIONS: toc (because this is really a local way to set org-export-with-toc). - Carsten
