Nicolas Goaziou <[email protected]> writes:
> Maybe UNNUMBERED property could imply a "not in TOC" clause in every
> back-end (I assume this is difficult to implement for LaTeX, though). In
> that case, UNNUMBERED would be a generic answer the problem.
Speaking of LaTeX: not-in-toc and unnumbered is easy enough in LaTeX as
it’s just section*. It’s what it does now. Unnumbered and in-the-toc is
harder, but e.g. KOMA-Script has it built in with \addpart{}, \addchap{}
(and maybe \addsec{}). To add unnumbered headings in plain latex one
would have to add \addcontentsline{toc}{level}{title}. Users have some
control over the matter in ox-latex via ox-latex-classes.
ox-odt, ox-html and ox-ascii all seem to add unnumbered headings to the
toc.
> Or UNNUMBERED could imply "not in TOC" in "ox-texinfo.el", but that's
> less good, IMO.
One nice thing about this, I guess, is that it might allow you to use the
"num" option to select which headings are kept out of the toc?
Rasmus
--
There are known knowns; there are things we know that we know
