Thank you! That solution is very promising indeed.

I see why it's quick and dirty though - it appears to be generation section
numbers, but just making the numbers invisible, so that the headings are
not flush with the left margin:
http://i.imgur.com/G6drpmf.png

Is there a solution to that, or is that just the way it is?

Thanks again.




On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 12:05 AM, Nick Dokos <ndo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Peter Salazar <cycleofs...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Thanks for the responses!
> >
> > John: Oh yes, of course. Sorry about that. inimal org file and config
> files are here. I had to make the org file long enough to make several
> pages, so the header displays. Here you
> > go:
> > https://github.com/petersalazar/org-troubleshooting
> >
> > Rasmus: #+OPTIONS: num:0 is what I started from. When I do that, the
> resulting PDF has no Table of Contents, and the header displays the section
> title as "Contents."
> >
> > The same thing happens with #+LATEX: \setcounter{secnumdepth}{0}.
> >
> > Richard: Your idea about
> > #+LATEX_HEADER: \renewcommand{...}
> >
> > sounds very promising! I'd love to know what the exact command is!
>
> The quick-and-dirty solution is
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> #+LATEX_HEADER: \renewcommand{\thesection}{}
> #+LATEX_HEADER: \renewcommand{\thesubsection}{}
> #+LATEX_HEADER: \renewcommand{\thesubsubsection}{}
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
> That's enough for the default secnumdepth of 3, but if you make that
> bigger, you'll have to make it even dirtier:
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> #+LATEX_HEADER: \renewcommand{\theparagraph}{}
> #+LATEX_HEADER: \renewcommand{\thesubparagraph}{}
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
> There is probably a cleaner way, but that would require cleverness
> and I don't have any right now.
>
> BTW, this turns off section numbers in the TOC as well, not just in the
> body of the document.
> --
> Nick
>
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to