My first instinct on hearing “heading level 7” is that perhaps the author of such a document should reconsider their structure ;) I never go more than three for normal documents. The designers HTML assumed 6 would be enough, but Word allows up to 9 levels.
Having >6 levels can be handy for outlining (in particular Word’s “outline view” mode), and in that instance I can see it would be useful. Regardless of it’s merits or otherwise, I think we should support this, but it will complicate things somewhat given that the existing logic generally assumes only six levels. Any levels above that, in the Word filter at least, are simply given their style name but otherwise considered normal paragraphs. Having a <div style=“corinthia-level-X”> is a good first approach (and I suggest using the corinthia- prefix in places where we have our own special behaviour; currently the prefix is uxwrite- in many places but that should be changed). However, it’s possible in Word to have multiple heading styles at the same outline level - for 1-6 this is fine, because we just give the style name and can express the outline level in HTML based on the tag number (h1 through h6). When we go to having <div> or <p> elements with a style name, there is no way to express the outline level as part of that, at least none that is immediately obvious to me. I’m not sure what the best solution here is for handling arbitrary depths. In theory we may also have file formats which support more than 9 outline levels (not sure what ODF’s limit is, but it may be possible with other formats). In that case we need to figure out how that would be expressed in terms of a Word document. Another possible solution is to just use h6 for every header of level greater than 6. While this “loses” information in the resulting HTML, I view it as a reasonable compromise in the sense that it fits within the semantics of HTML, and due to the use of bidirectional transformations, the heading level could remain the same (that is, 7 or greater) during update if the level has not been changed to < 6 during editing. — Dr Peter M. Kelly [email protected] PGP key: http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key <http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key> (fingerprint 5435 6718 59F0 DD1F BFA0 5E46 2523 BAA1 44AE 2966) > On 22 Jun 2015, at 8:22 pm, jan i <[email protected]> wrote: > > I want us to be consistent, not have one standard for header 1-6 and a > different for the rest. > > we can also use <p style=headerX> that is more or less the same as <div > style=headerX>. Only real difference > is that <div> do not have a default style. > > rgds > jan i. > > On 22 June 2015 at 15:18, Gabriela Gibson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> IIRC, Peter said to just make a <p> here. >> >> But I think I like Jan's idea because we can then later change things >> easily without losing the original marker of H7+. >> >> G >> >> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 2:15 PM, jan i <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 22 June 2015 at 14:59, Ian C <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> I have just been debugging what appeared as a strange error. >>>> >>>> Turns out due to a document header of level 7. HTML only has 1 -6. >>>> >>>> So when I increment passed 6 I ended up in HTML_HEAD... which explains >>>> what I was seeing. >>>> >>>> But how should we manage header levels greater than 6? With our own >>>> class and a div or something else? >>>> >>> my preference would be a div statement, linked to our own style (which of >>> course might be modified by the document). >>> >>> rgds >>> jan i. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> I see in the Word code there are some limit checks when receiving code. >>>> I looked at the Word the generation code but couldn't quite follow it, >>>> getting tired. >>>> >>>> Looks like it is limited too. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Cheers, >>>> >>>> Ian C >>>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Visit my Coding Diary: http://gabriela-gibson.blogspot.com/ >>
