Hi Nicolas, On 28.4.2013, at 09:28, Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello, > > Carsten Dominik <carsten.domi...@gmail.com> writes: > >> 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). > > The problem is that #+TOC cannot be a strict equivalent to > `org-export-with-toc', since the former cannot be introduced in the > document template. I am not sure I understand. What do you mean? > Also, this change would require each user back-end developer to check > for the presence of a TOC keyword with "headlines" value in the parse > tree when handling :with-toc property. This is not complicated, but > there are already many uncomplicated issues to think about when writing > a back-end. An alternative would be that the parser already makes this change. Upon finding #+TOC, it would change the OPTION value in the parse tree. > > In a nutshell, I don't think we should try to outsmart the user by > ignoring his setup here. I suggest to improve the manual, if needed, > instead. That is certainly an alternative, once I have understood the issues. Thanks for your patience. - Carsten
