[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: Request For Clarification: Indexterm processing in auto-index generation.
/ Tony Graham <Tony.Graham@MenteithConsulting.com> was heard to say: | On Wed, Mar 12 2008 14:01:48 +0000, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote: |> | FWIW, I think that scheme works okay in the CSS2 index at |> | http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-CSS2/indexlist.html |> |> Bleh. I think it looks ridiculous. But if the world disagrees with me, |> I won't stand in its way. I probably will give the "number all index |> terms sequentially" format a whirl when I have a chance. | | If you use the index frequently *and* the document is updated | frequently, isn't the "number all index terms sequentially" format the | worst of both worlds? Hmmm. Good point. I wonder if *both* would be a better compromise. Using square brackets to indicate hot text, suppose there's one index term in the section with "section title", two in the section with "other section title", three in the section with "third section title" and one again in the section with "fourt title": Term, [section title], other section title, , , third section title, , , , [fourth title] (Though, having proposed that, I'm not actually sure it can be achieved. I'd have to look at the code that does the collapsing again.) Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <email@example.com> | In science, "fact" can only mean http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | "confirmed to such a degree that Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | it would be perverse to withhold | provisional assent." I suppose | that apples might start to rise | tomorrow, but the possibility does | not merit equal time in physics | classrooms.--Stephen J. Gould